Q&A: The Value of Life
The Value of Life
Question
1. Why, in your opinion, do we step on insects that disgust us without any qualms of conscience, but would not dare strangle a noisy stray cat in heat? Is it morally justified to take into account the lives of animals that seem fairly intelligent to us while dismissing the lives of less intelligent animals? If not, why?
2. Until half a minute ago I was sitting in an excellent armchair and was very comfortable. In such a situation, should one try not to move unnecessarily—as much as possible, since an armchair was not given to the ministering angels—in order not to kill the dust mites on my dearly departed smartphone by typing strange questions in the responsa section?
Answer
1. First of all, there is psychology. A cat is bigger and closer to us. Beyond that, insects are less developed creatures and apparently have less awareness of pain, etc.
2. Definitely. At least as far as I’m concerned.
Discussion on Answer
Indeed. It is an explanation, not a justification.
Your arguments don’t show that there is no difference in the level of suffering. Noticing that something is wrong is not enough for that. On the contrary, it is clear that awareness contributes significantly to the level of suffering. What we see as reactions could be a mechanical-instinctive response.
-So the psychological reason is devoid of ethical value, right?
-Apparently an insect does have less awareness of pain, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t suffer or experience distress. Suddenly it can’t walk, it limps, it’s three-quarters crushed, missing a leg and an antenna. From their movements it דווקא seems that they notice that something bad is happening. If we smeared a person or a cat with an ointment that would paralyze its legs forever without any pain, wouldn’t it suffer?