Analysis Of The Essay 'Are All Species Equal?' By David Schmidtz

Biocentrism and Respect for Nature

In the essay, “Are All Species Equal?” the author, David Schmidtz, stiffly denounces the views on species egalitarianism by philosopher Paul Taylor. Schmidtz explores Taylor’s views from all angles and criticisms and concludes that “biocentrism has a point but that it does not require any commitment to species equality.” (Schmidtz, 115). Schmidtz agrees with the major points of biocentrism; that humans live on the same terms as all other species in the community, that all species are interdependent and are all in pursuit of their own good. However, each species should not all be looked upon as the same and with the same level of contributions as every other species. There’s no way to compare one living thing to another unless the two are exactly identical. Therefore, instead of saying that every species is in fact on the same level, we should respect that each living thing should be evaluated differently. This is where respect for nature comes into play. Respecting each individual species for its own attributions is more just than saying that all should be treated equally. Schmidtz goes on to say that biocentrism and respect for nature do not go hand in hand with species egalitarianism, which to me, is a valid

Schmidtz does in fact argue that we need to respect and be respected, but that the respect need not be equal nor universal. This is why I disagree. To be a moral person you need to respect things and people around you. You cannot call yourself a respectful person if you pick and choose who and what you respect, because it is disrespectful to disregard those. Plus, how does one choose who or what gets an amount of respect, if any at all? This goes along with the topic of racism. An example used in the article was killing tuna and keeping dolphin alive. Both serve the same purpose and essentially have the same qualities, so why say that one can be killed but not the