The question of ‘aesthetic relativism’ has been raised a long time ago and did not receive any commonly agreed, standard response. Why do we consider some things ‘cute’ and some – ‘ugly’? It is only a matter of personal tastes of individuals or groups of individuals who decide whether those things and creatures around them are attractive or not. Regarding the animals, there is a common belief that people consider cute only those animals who are soft, furry and make a pleasant impression. However, not every beautiful and furry animal is appreciated: while the majority of people like cats and dogs and pet rabbits, there are also rats and wildlife animals like minks or foxes who are not as lucky as their famous counterparts. Why do we love cats as family members and kill minks to make coats from their fur? Apparently, there is some hypocrisy towards animals that makes humans take care of ones and eradicate others unless they fall under some aesthetic category.
Among modern political ideologies and philosophies, there is a debate over the question of humanity’s place in nature and his or her relationship with its inhabitants. According to the ecocentric ideology, ‘humans are only a part of the ecosystem,’ and the ecosphere is more significant than the human part of nature (“Module 7 – Environmental Ethics, Animal Rights, Human Genetic Research,” n.d.). Deep ecology is the environmental philosophy that proclaims that humans’ goal is ‘to embody a relational perspective and inspire others to become better stewards of the Earth,’ meaning that no difference should be made between living creatures regardless of their utility (“Module 7 – Environmental Ethics, Animal Rights, Human Genetic Research,” n.d.). Building a relationship with nature rather than seizing it is a viewpoint of the ecological feminist’s movement which emphasizes the role of the emotions in our relationships with nature and animals (“Module 7 – Environmental Ethics, Animal Rights, Human Genetic Research,” n.d.).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Four-Legged Friends or Foes?".
While each of the postulates as mentioned above has their advantages, one should inevitably stand on the side of a particular viewpoint. This paper is going to take several principles of the deep ecology philosophy and analyze through the lens of a discussion question: are we hypocrites to love ‘cute’ animals and eat the ‘ugly’ ones?
Labeling living beings in categories of cuteness as a decision-making factor for their existence is profoundly dangerous. If the same principles were applied to the human society, every person who is subjectively considered attractive would have eaten all of those who are considered unpretty or made an outerwear from them. Being considered ‘cute’ does not give some living being an inherent value and does not account for any progress in natural development. The idea of humans deciding which animal should live or die according to their look or utility contradicts the nature-centric approach. Additionally, there would have been no evolution with such human-centricity (Dean Burnett, 2013).
Tom Regan, a philosopher, known for animal rights advocacy actions, has analyzed the traditional philosophical viewpoints on justice and ethics in the human relationship with nature to find out the answer to the question: do we have enough rights to choose what animal to kill or save? After decomposing distinguished philosophers’ justifications for this issue, Regan found out that being alive is a sufficient reason to be proclaimed as having an ‘inherent value’ (Regan, 2004). He argues that the moment we start filtering living creatures by the amount of our interest in them (whether we would use them for food or fur), then this value is abandoned, and we become self-proclaimed moral agents who decide who can live and who cannot (Regan, 2004).
The hypocrisy towards animals has been displayed in the American cyberpunk literature, particularly in Philip K. Dick’s ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’. In this post-apocalyptic novel, Philip K. Dick has demonstrated the psychological value of living creatures in the world that can be usurped by soulless robots. What would keep a human alive on Earth that is about to disappear? Mercy and compassion to the closest ones, to the living beings with soul and dedication (Dick, 2010). Animals can evoke warm, positive feelings; they can be faithful. Finally, they can become our friends in the pure form, and we cannot judge our friends by their appearances.
