Comparing animals to evil

[Dogbean]

The following is a quote from my friend on facebook who was discussing something with me. I thought it would open an interesting discussion here.

"You know thought I always find it interesting that we call someone who does something really bad or evil an "animal." Animals don't kill for revenge. Or sport. Or to stop someone from identifying them. They don't rape. They don't steal just because they feel like it. They only kill for food or self defense. We are the only species on earth that commits such acts."

I think this is true. Animals are not capable of the pure evil that humans are. Animals only have instinct. Why do we call a murderer an animal? That is an insult to animals. You can't compare animal instinct to premeditated murder. They are completely different.

Discuss.....

 

[Beanieboy]

I don't know if I agree with your thesis. My friend had a cat that used to chew off the feet of mice and then put them in my friend's shoes, and basically torture them before killing them. Dogs put their tail between their legs when they feel that they have done something wrong. If all of that is simply instinct (while individual animals clearly show different personalities), then one has to argue that all humans are is their own instincts based on genes.

 

[Dogbean]

Beanieboy,
I think dogs do things out of protest, to make their feelings known, but not out of evil. For example, when a dog chews up your house because you were out too long, they are trying to send you a message. Sometimes a dog will take a dump on your carpet because they're mad, but it's not pure evil. It happened to us the other day; we were out a long time, then came home and put the dog outside for about 20 minutes to relieve herself. Then we let her in and she got right in front of my wife (who she prefers over anyone else in the house) and took a dump on the carpet right in front of her. She then immediatly sat down and let us pick her up to be put in the kennel (because that's her punishment if she does that...a few minutes in the kennel). She knew what she was doing and knew it was wrong. But it's not pure evil like I was talking about in the first post.

 

[angelpie545]

Of course the argument can be made that much of what an animal does is derived from instinct, but I will venture to say that I do believe animals are capable of more based on what I have seen.

 

[Dogbean]

Of course the argument can be made that much of what an animal does is derived from instinct, but I will venture to say that I do believe animals are capable of more based on what I have seen.

Yes, but not to the pure evil that humans are capable of (using premeditated murder as an example).

 

[Autumnleaf]

Yes, but not to the pure evil that humans are capable of (using premeditated murder as an example).

Even in premeditated murder people rationalize what they are doing. A case in point is Stalin. He had millions starved to death for what he thought was a good reason. Was he a monster? Was he an animal? Was he an educated man following a wayward path?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

I don't know if I agree with your thesis. My friend had a cat that used to chew off the feet of mice and then put them in my friend's shoes, and basically torture them before killing them.

I think the cat is giving a gift to his human counterpart. Maybe he is trying to see if he can teach his human to hunt. I've seen shows where females will bring their young live prey for such a purpose. I don't think animals contemplate torture. At least I hope they don't.

To answer the OP, people are "animals" when they do things that seem base and unreasoning. I think that is where the term finds its menaing.

 

[Dogbean]

Even in premeditated murder people rationalize what they are doing. A case in point is Stalin. He had millions starved to death for what he thought was a good reason. Was he a monster? Was he an animal? Was he an educated man following a wayward path?

The guidelines of what is right and wrong are pretty clearly spelled out in the Bible. That is our absolute moral authority. Whether you are a Believer or not, that is what you'll be judged by when you die. So by that definition, Stalin was not acting rightly.

 

[Autumnleaf]

The guidelines of what is right and wrong are pretty clearly spelled out in the Bible. That is our absolute moral authority. Whether you are a Believer or not, that is what you'll be judged by when you die. So by that definition, Stalin was not acting rightly.

Were the Jews acting "rightly" in the old testament when they killed every man, woman, and child in the conquored lands that God told them to?

Genocide is ughly and it is in the Bible. As far as I know animals don't do it. Except for maybe some superbugs.

 

[Isambard]

Your friends post is grossly mistaken.

"Animals don't kill for revenge."

Some do. Ants and Chimps fight wars agaisnt competing tribes/colonies. In the of the chimps, revenge can certainly be a motivator.

"Or sport."

Cats?

"Or to stop someone from identifying them."

Most wild animals run away when you get near.

"They don't rape."

Chimps again.

"They don't steal just because they feel like it."

Chimps.

"They only kill for food or self defense."

Wrong.

"We are the only species on earth that commits such acts"

Wrong

 

[MoonlessNight]

The comparisons of highly immoral people to animals usually stem from a notion that a person has given themselves over to their passions, like an animal. That is, they don't have restraint or a notion of right or wrong, just as we consider animals to lack those characteristics.

On the other hand I notice that people who say things that glorify animals usually don't know much about real animal behavior. Though I unfortunately can't give concrete counterexamples to what the op posts (at this moment), I suspect that they may exist for all the points. At least there was no "animals don't kill their own species." And of course there is always the "it isn't applicable anyway" escape as a last resort. Like: "this animal stole this food and didn't eat it" (so stealing just because it felt like it) with response: "well animals don't understand ownership so it isn't stealing." Or "this seems to be forced sex between two animals of this species" with "well they don't really understand consent anyway so you can't call it rape."

 

[Isambard]

The guidelines of what is right and wrong are pretty clearly spelled out in the Bible. That is our absolute moral authority. Whether you are a Believer or not, that is what you'll be judged by when you die. So by that definition, Stalin was not acting rightly.

Absolutely correct. Stalin would go to hell cause his mass killing of innocents wasnt God approved like the genocides of the ancient jews were.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Your friends post is grossly mistaken.

"Animals don't kill for revenge."

Some do. Ants and Chimps fight wars agaisnt competing tribes/colonies. In the of the chimps, revenge can certainly be a motivator.

"Or sport."

Cats?

"Or to stop someone from identifying them."

Most wild animals run away when you get near.

"They don't rape."

Chimps again.

"They don't steal just because they feel like it."

Chimps.

"They only kill for food or self defense."

Wrong.

"We are the only species on earth that commits such acts"

Wrong

And you have asked these animals questions that garnered these replies?

If so, no longer is my dog going to be allowed to be with me in the bathroom, when I, er, um, you know, I uh, "use it."

The bathroom that is.

 

[plindboe]

Just recently here in Denmark there was a news story about a lake where the male ducks outnumbered the female ducks 10 to 1. The female ducks were literally being raped to death, and the lake were filled with dead female ducks. It wasn't a surprise to me, as I'm aware of the fact that rape is quite common among ducks.

It's easy thinking that we're the only ones who can commit horrific acts, as that is what we see and hear about. The reason for this is that we are the ones who are generally in control over the animals, so we are the ones holding the power to abuse. Don't think for a second that it would be better if animals were in control.

Peter

 

[lawtonfogle]

Your friends post is grossly mistaken.

"Animals don't kill for revenge."

Some do. Ants and Chimps fight wars agaisnt competing tribes/colonies. In the of the chimps, revenge can certainly be a motivator.

"Or sport."

Cats?

"Or to stop someone from identifying them."

Most wild animals run away when you get near.

"They don't rape."

Chimps again.

"They don't steal just because they feel like it."

Chimps.

"They only kill for food or self defense."

Wrong.

"We are the only species on earth that commits such acts"

Wrong

Chimps... aren't they the ones with the closest DNA? Maybe it is in the genes?

 

[sidhe]

Your friends post is grossly mistaken.

"Animals don't kill for revenge."

Some do. Ants and Chimps fight wars agaisnt competing tribes/colonies. In the of the chimps, revenge can certainly be a motivator.

"Or sport."

Cats?

"Or to stop someone from identifying them."

Most wild animals run away when you get near.

"They don't rape."

Chimps again.

"They don't steal just because they feel like it."

Chimps.

"They only kill for food or self defense."

Wrong.

"We are the only species on earth that commits such acts"

Wrong

Dolphins have also been known to kill for sport, particularly the bottlenosed. They have a habit of picking out smaller species of dolphins and using them as "toys," tossing them out of the water to each other and such, before killing them when they get bored.

 

[Isambard]

And you have asked these animals questions that garnered these replies?

If so, no longer is my dog going to be allowed to be with me in the bathroom, when I, er, um, you know, I uh, "use it."

The bathroom that is.

Observing their behavior and having them pass the mirror test is all that is necessary. Simply asking them would do little one could ask someone who doesnt speak english or is deaf and not get a response.

 

[selfinflikted]

The argument in the OP is bunk. It seems to leave out, or forget one small but very important detail - humans are animals.

That is all.

 

[yasic]

Yes, as pointed out many animals do all of the qualities, essentially the smarter the animal, the more 'evil human like' attributes they have.

Whales (Dolphins are just the tip of the iceberg), Apes (us included), cats, k-9's, and rodents of all sorts do pretty much all of the listed above.

 

[MoonlessNight]

The argument in the OP is bunk. It seems to leave out, or forget one small but very important detail - humans are animals.

That is all.

From a perspective of modern taxonomy.

There is plenty of linguistic precedent, however, to use the term "animal" to the exclusion of humans. If it bothers you that much replace the term "animal" with "non-human animal" or "non-rational animal."

Next we won't be able to use the term "wolf" to the exclusion of domesticated dogs.