In his book Respect for Nature, Taylor analyses and critiques the different claims of humans'
superiority to nonhumans (based on Greek Humanism and Cartesian Dualism).
Ex: begging the question logical fallacy
Humanism - rational thought deems us superior
Dualism - humans have souls, animals don’t
“For animals that neither enjoy thinking for its own sake nor
need it for living the kind of life for which they are best adapted,
it has no value. Even if “thinking” is broadened to include all
forms of consciousness, there are still many living things that
can do without it and yet live what is for their species a good
life. The anthropocentricity underlying the claim to human
superiority runs throughout Cartesian dualism” (Taylor 82).
These traditional claims of human
superiority are
ANTHROPOCENTRIC: they make
their claim from a strictly human
point of view where the good of all
humans is the standard of
judgement.
Taylor argues that standards based only on human values must not be
assumed to be the only valid criteria of merit. Moral standards are not
applicable to beings that lack capacities of a moral agent, such as
animals and plants.
Being born into the species Homo Sapiens does not entitle lordship
over those who are born into other species. He supports a biocentric
egalitarian viewpoint: All living beings have intrinsic value therefore
they must be considered while not assigning humans as higher priority.
Humans are deemed members of the Earth’s community of life.