Comments on “The Priority of Human Interests”

Abstract

There are, apparently, people who think that a dog’s life is as valuable as a human’s, who would hold that if it is a choice between saving a human being or saving a dog but not both, there is no prima facie basis for preferring the human. One can even imagine someone extending this attitude to insects or plants. And there is no a priori reason to assume that such people are unlikely to be converted by argument. It is logically possible that someone might be led reluctantly to such a position by the fallacy of affirming the consequent, and give it up with relief when his mistake is pointed out. But on a posteriori grounds I am pessimistic about the prospects for discussions with such thinkers.