>>5034469
>I always find it so retarded when we as humans judge animals based on human morality.
That in itself is a "retarded" thing to say since animals definitely do judge humans based on their own morality.
For example the Female leopard seal repeatedly trying to feed a male diver -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmVWGvO8Yhk
And the Leopard seal that drowned a woman because it could.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_seal#Death_of_Kirsty_Brown
>Like animals are more worthy of admiration if they coincidentally adhere more closely to our type of behavior.
That's exactly how non-human think though...
>Nature doesn't have morality
completely and utterly wrong.
Humans deemed to be more attractive by humans are also judged to be more attractive by other mammals. Even something as distantly related to us as chickens show a preference for more attractive humans.
https://sci-hub.se/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12110-002-1021-6
Human men are more likely to kill the offspring of other men than their own and human women are more likely to kill their own offspring than the offspring of other women.
You see this exact same pattern of behavior in Horses, Bears, Cetaceans etc.
The similarities disappear very quickly outside of mammals.
>and to say some creatures are less worthy of reverence based on something we have developed due to the luxury of civilization is incredibly ignorant.
Civilization isn't a luxury. Humans worked our asses off to create it out of nothing. We deserve it.
Also it isn't abnormal. It's what we are. No different from a bird nest being a product of what birds are.
Anon. Go outside and leave your furry reddit autism at the front door please.
And of course the /an/ moderation hasn't changed in the slightest over the last five years.
No wonder /an/ is completely fucking dead.
The only thing you can safely do is post pictures of animals being cute. God forbid anyone uses their fucking brains. Even just once. Instant warning.
