# Human rights for apes **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 17, 2006, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795 "2006-07-17T01:04:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Blanche](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Blanche](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blanche)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2006, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/41 "2006-07-20T14:04:38Z")
If they pass this, I could see how it could cause a lot of problems. If great apes are given rights in Spain that they do not enjoy elsewhere, could the Spanish justify removing apes from their country that were brought there illegally? I’d think not. This will lead to an increase in ape theft by radical animal rights activists, because they’ll have someplace to take them. Spain would be inundated with apes smuggled into their country and then released to be somebody elses problem. Labs, zoos, and animal parks that have great apes will have to either increase their security or stop keeping them. One of the things holding back these activists is that there was not much point in freeing captive apes because it wasn’t likely to improve their condition. That will change. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2006, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/42 "2006-07-20T19:28:57Z")
[QUOTE=Mighty\_Girl] I think you are confused about politics in Spain. It doesn’t work the same way as in the US. [/QUOTE] Ah, good point there. Thanks. :smack: :o ---
**Author:** ![vetbridge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b5e925/32.png) [@vetbridge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vetbridge)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2006, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/43 "2006-07-20T20:37:43Z")
If this law were to pass, how do you get around later having to offer apes reparations? Also, what would become of non human primate use in research facilities? ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/44 "2006-07-21T04:57:58Z")
[QUOTE=cowgirl] How can you tell if something is “self-aware” if they can’t tell us? Are apes? Your cat? Octopuses? How would you measure it? Etc. [/QUOTE] Or a parrot. A parrot can talk, but is it communication? I imagine if it figures out that when it says, ‘Polly want a cracker’, that it gets a cracker that would be communication. Does that mean if you have a choice between and ape, a parrot, and a baby to pull out of a burning building you choose the parrot? > [@](#): > > The point here is that there is _no_ indicator that would include infants and severely disabled people, and exclude great apes, according to the criteria of “morally relevant” and “externally verifiable.” I’m in another thread in GD on abortion where a similar issue is being discussed. Lines are arbitrary. So you set a line that includes apes today, why not move it more and include cats and dogs? Or ants? What have you. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![cowgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8c91f0/32.png) [@cowgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cowgirl)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/45 "2006-07-21T13:12:33Z")
[QUOTE=Uzi] Or a parrot. A parrot can talk, but is it communication? I imagine if it figures out that when it says, ‘Polly want a cracker’, that it gets a cracker that would be communication. Does that mean if you have a choice between and ape, a parrot, and a baby to pull out of a burning building you choose the parrot? [/quote] I think we are not understanding each other. Nobody has said that “communication” should be the measure, in fact I have argued that there is no measure, so I don’t know where you get your hypothetical above. Second, nobody has said that even if you could find some morally relevant indicator, that there aren’t gradations within it. Not Singer nor the Spanish gvt nor anyone in this thread has suggested that you should value the life of a parrot (or even a great ape) over the life of a baby. Also, I am quite explicitly not saying anything absolute about where the line should be. I am saying that the line as we currently envision it is inconsistently applied, and that we need to discuss where to put it. > [@](#): > > I’m in another thread in GD on abortion where a similar issue is being discussed. Lines are arbitrary. So you set a line that includes apes today, why not move it more and include cats and dogs? Or ants? What have you. I agree that any line would be arbitrary. But what I (and Singer, and the Spanish government) am saying is that even though it is arbitrary, it should still be consistent. This is an ongoing philosophical discussion that our society needs to have. Just because it is conceivably possible that a particular line of argument could, in theory, lead to something else you disagree with, does that mean that the argument is necessarily invalid? Isn’t that a logical fallacy? ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/46 "2006-07-21T13:34:39Z")
[QUOTE=cowgirl] Just because it is conceivably possible that a particular line of argument could, in theory, lead to something else you disagree with, does that mean that the argument is necessarily invalid? [/QUOTE] I’m not saying I disagree with it. I’m saying that the line could just as well be moved to exclude some humans as to include apes. And by moving that line it doesn’t mean that those outside of it should get a bullet in the head, or start being tortured as has been noted by yourself in regards to apes. Maybe it means that heroic measures aren’t taken to keep someone alive who is obviously brain dead, etc. ---
**Author:** ![cowgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8c91f0/32.png) [@cowgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cowgirl)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/47 "2006-07-21T16:14:43Z")
[QUOTE=Uzi] I’m not saying I disagree with it. I’m saying that the line could just as well be moved to exclude some humans as to include apes. And by moving that line it doesn’t mean that those outside of it should get a bullet in the head, or start being tortured as has been noted by yourself in regards to apes. Maybe it means that heroic measures aren’t taken to keep someone alive who is obviously brain dead, etc. [/QUOTE] Yep, that’s another part of Singer’s argument. You should really take a look at _Rethinking Life and Death_ if you’re interested in this stuff. He doesn’t focus on rights for great apes specifically, but does discuss it in the context of abortion and assisted suicide. Very interesting stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Love](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Dr.Love](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Love)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/48 "2006-07-21T17:36:38Z")
[QUOTE=cowgirl] I think we are not understanding each other. Nobody has said that “communication” should be the measure, in fact I have argued that there is no measure, so I don’t know where you get your hypothetical above. Second, nobody has said that even if you could find some morally relevant indicator, that there aren’t gradations within it. Not Singer nor the Spanish gvt nor anyone in this thread has suggested that you should value the life of a parrot (or even a great ape) over the life of a baby. [/QUOTE] I’ve only had the briefest of experience with Singer, but he must have mellowed over the years, given what you’ve said, and I’m a little curious about some of it. As I recall, he has asserted the following: [ol][li] There is precisely one moral indicator: the ability to feel pain.[/li][li] There are no morally relevant gradation of this indicator.[/li][li] Therefore, all animals have exactly equal moral worth.[/li][/ol] If this has changed, I’m intrigued and would like to know more. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/49 "2006-07-21T18:01:11Z")
[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull] They did in the post that I responded to. [/QUOTE] No “they” didn’t. You just didn’t understand the post is all. If you want to question my sanity, take it to the pit, where I can explain your error more fully. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/50 "2006-07-21T23:08:23Z")
[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman] I don’t think so. But the Spaniards are very clever. You will recall that they want Gibraltar presently in British hands? Guess what? There are about 160 apes living on Gibraltar with aboriginal claim to the island. [/QUOTE] The ‘apes’ living on Gibraltar are not apes at all; they are monkeys; this is not a trifling distinction when it comes to arguments about rights for primates on the grounds of their similarity to humans. Moreover, the monkeys on Gibraltar are thought to have been ointroduced by the British (for shooting practice, apparently) at around about the time when they took possession of Gib. ---
**Author:** ![spingears](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@spingears](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spingears)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/51 "2006-07-21T23:12:08Z")
[QUOTE=TitoGrey] Hello guys, [/QUOTE] What about ape rights for humans? ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2006, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/52 "2006-07-22T03:34:52Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] No “they” didn’t. You just didn’t understand the post is all. If you want to question my sanity, take it to the pit, where I can explain your error more fully. Daniel [/QUOTE] It did too. You made a direct comparison. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2006, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/53 "2006-07-22T16:16:08Z")
[QUOTE=Dr. Love] I’ve only had the briefest of experience with Singer, but he must have mellowed over the years, given what you’ve said, and I’m a little curious about some of it. As I recall, he has asserted the following: [ol][li] There is precisely one moral indicator: the ability to feel pain.[/li][li] There are no morally relevant gradation of this indicator.[/li][li] Therefore, all animals have exactly equal moral worth.[/li][/ol] If this has changed, I’m intrigued and would like to know more. [/QUOTE] It hasn’t changed. But, of course, that’s because your summary is a lie. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2006, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/54 "2006-07-23T05:21:19Z")
[QUOTE=Apos] It hasn’t changed. But, of course, that’s because your summary is a lie. [/QUOTE] When someone says that they ‘recall’ something and then write down what they recall from memory, then they are not a liar if they are mistaken. It is just that, a mistake. Especially, if they ask for more information about what they have said afterwards. Now you may have other information to back up the claim that the poster was lying, or maybe you just come from a planet where ‘to lie’ means something different from the standard meaning the rest of us place on it? Might I ask which is it, please? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2006, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795/55 "2006-07-24T18:04:49Z")
[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull] It did too. You made a direct comparison. [/QUOTE] My goodness. Apples and oranges are both sweet and delicious; that is a direct comparison. That does not constitute calling an apple an orange. Do I really need to explain this to you? Next lesson: what I did was to contrast our treatment of humans and apes, not to compare them. Because this is a distinction most common to literature, I’ll let it slide; it makes sense to say that I compared them. But to suggest that I called apes “folks” is to show that you don’t grasp the simplest thing I say. Daniel [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/human-rights-for-apes/364795.md?page=2)