The Case Against Human Exceptionalism

Anthropocentrism is presented as the root of abuse toward other creatures through the belief that only humans deserve consideration. Nonhuman animals are described as capable of complex perception, communication, tool use, dreaming, and social cultures, undermining claims of human exceptionalism. Species are framed as unique and important within diverse communities, with none inherently more valuable than others. An inclusive ethic is proposed that centers community and includes all living creatures and entities. Animals are positioned as co-creators of animal ethics, requiring listening to what they want and need and granting them agency and freedom to choose.

"“Anthropocentrism is at the root of all abuse of our fellow creatures on earth - the logically unsupportable belief that humans are the only species on the planet worthy of consideration.” - Sir Brian May, founding member of Queen and Save Me Trust.1"

"“For far too long, self-serving speciesist anthropocentrism has dominated how we view and position nonhuman animals (animals) in the natural world. Arguing for human exceptionalism while placing animals below and separate from ourselves, misleads some people into thinking we are above and separate from other species-often cashed out as we are ‘better’ and ‘more valuable’ than them- a myth that doesn't represent what solid transdisciplinary science has repeatedly shown.”"

"“In fact, nonhumans are not sub-human, and viewing all species as unique and important in their own ways is a better representation of the members of many earth's diverse communities, none being better or more valuable than the others. These are among the many reasons why I found Dr. Josephine Donovan's recent book Radical Natural Law: The Critical Standpoint of Animals and Nature to be an important and enlightening read in which she successfully decenters humans, recenters other animals, and offers a holistic view of the natural world.”"

Read at Psychology Today