Are humans the most valuable organisms on the planet?

People like you hold back the progression of the human race. People thought exploring out of Europe would cause them to fall off the face of the earth, too. Should they have stayed on their continent? Seriously, why should I be worshiping a huge rock when I am the most complex organism living on it? The human race (as we have already PROVEN by landing on the moon) has the ability to up and leave this one small planet so why should we tie ourselves down to it?

"By declaring that in another 100-200 years, we will discard this planet like an unwanted toy is very childish and ridiculous. I have yet to hear about another planet as perfect the one we live in now and also the technology to send billions of people to it."

Read my post before you assault it please. I never ONCE said to treat the planet like an unwanted toy, I said we SHOULD take care it, but not tie ourselves down to it. In fact, I used history to explain that the human race is doing JUST that, 50 years ago we treated the planet MUCH worse than we do now. Humans have made great strides in realizing the damage caused to the planet and are taking steps to help resuscitate it. Then you go on to say that because we don't have the technology or a destination NOW, we won't leave? Do I really have to point out what is wrong with this statement? Did we have cars and computers 200 years ago? Did people FORSEE the creation of technology we have now? And on not knowing if we have a destination planet, do you KNOW how many planets there are in the universe? To suggest that there aren't at least thousands of other planet humans could inhabit just like earth is asinine.

"I hope that we leave you and your ego behind."

I apologize for believing in the human race. For shame.

"Humans are only valuable to each other. Who really cares if you can land on the moon? Only humans do."

What else, that we know of, even has the capacity to care about us landing on the moon? Do you read what you write?

I can't believe all the ridiculous things being said to justify the human race.

Treating the earth like a temporary home is absurd. The earth is more than a place of residence, it is the reason life exists. It is a living, breathing organism that is uniquely built to sustain life. If you stopped and literately smelt the roses, you would find that without all these other organisms, you would not be here. We depend on the sun and water to grow vegetation, plants and bacteria to supply us with food and oxygen, animals for food, clothing, and shelter. The list goes on and on. Furthermore, every human thought and invention has been created through our use or interaction with other living and non-living organism. The Earth provides us with all our necessities, unlike your man-made iphone which just surfs the web and calls your friends.

By declaring that in another 100-200 years, we will discard this planet like an unwanted toy is very childish and ridiculous. I have yet to hear about another planet as perfect the one we live in now and also the technology to send billions of people to it. If this max exodus does occur in the foreseeable future...I hope that we leave you and your ego behind.

Humans are only valuable to each other. Who really cares if you can land on the moon? Only humans do.

The points you make are valid but the one thing I think you are still overlooking is the different level of emotion involved. Sure, there are endangered species and people are concerned about their welfare, etc. That gets coverage, but doesn't inspire the kind of widespread emotion that an event like September 11th does. I did not know a single person who died on September 11th, 2001, not one, yet it still is one of the most devastating days I can remember from my childhood. I do not believe I am alone in holding this opinion. If 300 0 golden retrievers were targeted and killed in a terrorist bombing it would not hold the same power. This is why when you say:

"Let me ask you something, every time someone dies, are you "very, very sad"? Probably not, otherwise you'd be one of hell of a depressed individual. See how it's so easy to compare something random to something you care about and win an argument? That's precisely what you did before."

Completely invalid. I do not know when everyone dies, there are too many people. I didn't know anyone involved in Sept. 11, however, and I was still very very sad about it. It isn't random, it is a good comparison. If someone told me that either my dog died or a random (healthy, not dying anyway) person somewhere in the world, I would have to choose my dog. Human life is MORE valuable than animal life.

Your point about it being personal experience that gives not just me but everyone a greater attachment to people than humans, is right. But look at the word you used, PERSONal. It is IMPOSSIBLE to connect on the same level with an animal that one can connect with a human. Humans are inherently more able to interact and create relationships with one another.

The reasons why humans are more valuable than every other species on the planet and should be treated that way are twofold: 1. We can reason. Humans are intelligent creatures who can use logic and think about consequences of actions. We have the ability to grow far beyond this one planet and colonize space, rendering the "most valuable organisms on the planet" question moot. 2. We can empathize. Humans can feel other humans, and animals, pain. They can feel sympathy and put themselves in another person's shoes. This is what gives humans desire to help the needy and protect endangered species. These two abilities are the reason why PERSONal experience can tie humans together much closer than animals.

The very idea that we are talking about whether animals should be given equal treatment as humans is a combination of these two traits. Hypothetically, if dinosaurs ruled the earth at the time of early human existence, do you think they would be on a site like outquib.com discussing whether or not those puny little mammals should be given equal treatment? Dinosaurs cannot reason nor empathize, neither can any other creature on the planet. Humans are the sole proprietors of this ability.

Should we take care of animals? Yes. Are we on the same level as them? No way. We will share this earth with them for another few hundred years at most and then we'll, for the most part, be gone. Our potential as a species is greater than this planet can contain. They can have the earth back...we'll leave...it'll probably benefit them anyway.

You missed the point completely.

You derive such emotional attachment with your mother, girlfriend, who ever because of your personal experiences with them not simply because they are human. It's obvious that your personal experience is obviously enhanced because you're both human, there are advantages to that.

Let's work with what you've stated thus far:
"I love my dog, she is a great companion and I will be very, very sad when she passes away."

Let me ask you something, every time someone dies, are you "very, very sad"? Probably not, otherwise you'd be one of hell of a depressed individual. See how it's so easy to compare something random to something you care about and win an argument? That's precisely what you did before.

In this argument, we are not talking about people who you've had an experience with and how they outweigh a random animal, we're talking about how you can derive the same value in an animal just as a human. The emotional investment in both can equate to the same value in your eyes.

September 11th was an extremist attack on a certain kind of people, 3000 cats dying after a kennel explosion is quite different. And yes it does get coverage, ever heard of the endangered species list? Wonder why Australia's citizens are protesting over Japan killing Whales? It's getting more coverage considering there's thousands of organizations and protests occurring every day.

I attempted to squelch an argument of emotional value by providing my point that we can derive similar emotional value from an animal just as a human. It depends on everyone's experience.

The prospect and potential of value is the same in my eyes, humans aren't inherently more valuable. I think it's harsh and egotistical to think so.

In response to the Original Post:

I read this response again more carefully and came across something that struck me. You said that humans do not show more of an affinity towards members of their own species than towards dogs/cats or other household pets. I don't think this could be further from the truth. You use the example of a beloved pet dying and the sadness derived from it but don't really give it a fair comparison under similar circumstances. What about when a mother loses a child? Uou don't believe the tragedy there outweighs the feeling the same woman would have if her pet dog died? What if kennel with 3000 cats exploded, you think that would get the same coverage as September 11th did or inspire the same emotion?

The emotional investment humans place in members of their own species outweighs what they place in pets and it isn't even close. I love my dog, she is a great companion and I will be very, very sad when she passes away. But the pain from that wouldn't even be comparable to one of my parents, brother, girlfriend, friend losing their life. I don't believe I am in the minority here, either.

You are answering a different question that was originally asked, I think. I would tend to agree that humans are not valuable TO the planet, as we use its resources and (unfortunately) pretty much destroy it. However, my answer to the original question (are we the most valuable ON the planet) would be an emphatic yes. The human brain is the most complex and powerful thing we know of (so far)...human life is by far (in my opinion) the single most important thing and must be valued above all else.

Our planet is just a rock with an atmosphere...we can prove that its existance has a limit. It really cannot be proven that the human race has a limit.

How valuable are humans to the planet is related directly to the question of what do humans add to the planet when compared to the rest of the organisms. When it comes down it to i feel that humans just don't add much and in fact take so much away. We have devastated the living places of countless other living beings, and other effects such has the emissions of toxic chemicals have had a negative effect on the planet. I think that like was said earlier we value humans due to the fact that we are human, however this doesn't make us intrinsically valuable. I'm not sure what organism is more valuable then humans, but I'm going to go ahead and think that there is something out there that adds something to the planet, which is something I feel that humans don't do. Regardless of how valuable we feel we are, or how much "better" we feel i believe that we are not more valuable to the planet then other organisms are.

All of those harms we have done to the planet were necessary to our evolution as a species, in my opinion. We were completely unaware when the majority of the damage was done (we were killing the planet at a much faster rate in the 50's than we are now) and will take steps to temper that destruction.

The earth will be important to humans for another 100-200 years (arbitrary guess) until we become able to leave it. Humankind is bigger than this one planet, it is just our current home. We should take care of it just as one would take care of an apartment they are staying in, but our potential is much greater than this one rock.

No matter what happens our stay on this planet is limited. Eventually it will hurl into the sun and long before that it will become unbearable to live on, we will need to have a mass exodus at some point.

I guess what I am saying is that in my humble opinion humans are not only the most valuable organisms on the planet....they are far more valuable than the planet itself. Is this arrogant? Probably. I don't see any other animals landing on the moon (unless we blast them there :) )

Inside my tiny mind, it seems that humans are one of the least valuable organisms on the planet. With the exception of domesticated plants and animals and bread-eating ducks, the world around us does not depend on us for survival.

On that note, I guess our most notable value (if you can call it that) is out ability to destroy the earth like no other animal. Ground pollution, air pollution, noise pollution, deforestation, global warming, hunting to extinction, etc. Yeah...I would say we're pretty good at destroying the environment. I have yet to see any other species do as much destruction as we already have.

An interesting question. I believe the reason we value human life over other life on earth is simply because we are humans. It is instinctual for us to survive and procreate, therefore naturally we value human life above everything else. It is ingrained in our DNA to do anything to survive individually, and that seems to apply race-wide as well.

So the next question would be, why not hold animal life as sacred also? I would argue that we are moving in that direction. One hundred years ago organizations such as PETA did not exist and animal testing was a non-issue. We are becoming progressively more aware of animal rights.

I do not believe, however, that humans will ever hold animal life in the same regard that they hold their own life. Our ability to reason and uphold morality sets us apart from every other creature on the planet. If you place a starving dog and a well-fed dog next to each other and offer them a steak, the well-fed dog is not going to pass up the steak so that the starving dog can survive. Most humans would sacrafice in the same situation. We are on an entire different level intellectually and valuing our lives more makes sense to us.

Anyway, I would say in a nutshell that the reason human life is more valuable than animal life is the capacity to reason, something entirely unique to our race as far as we know.