Suppose that most animals behaved in a certain way 

Will we follow the behavior of animals? The probability of this situation is not big. Thomas Aquinas said: “Natural law is what we have in common. It refers to our rational capacity to discern general principles in the order of nature to enable us to flourish as a species in communities, given that by nature we are social animals.” Since we are all considered animals and if animals behave a certain way than you would assume that we would too. But I do not believe that humans will follow the lead of other animals since we can look at the other animals for moral and personhood.

Human beings have more rights and have their own judgments about things. We would not eat each other as other animals would since it would be morally wrong to harm another human being. And we have purpose consciousness that is formed and developed in labor practice. Natural law theory is something that is natural and acting like an animal is not natural.

Get quality help now

Bella Hamilton

Verified writer

Proficient in: Animal

5 (234)

“ Very organized ,I enjoyed and Loved every bit of our professional interaction ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

First, only humans are morally considered is sometimes referred to as 'speciesism'. In the 1970s, Richard Ryder coined the term during the Oxford campaign, expressing a ubiquitous, human-centered prejudice that he considered being similar to racism. This promotes us to form our own world. Humans have developed a moral system and a wide range of other valuable practices. By creating these systems, we separate humans from the rest of the animal kingdom. Even the category of 'human' itself has moral controversy. For example, some people believe that racism is even discrimination and prejudice.

Also, everyone has a unique personality. Like Kant writes that: “The fact that the human being can have the representation “I” raises him infinitely above all the other beings on earth. By this, he is a person…. that is, a being altogether different in rank and dignity from things, such as irrational animals, with which one may deal and dispose at one’s discretion.” (Kant [1798] 2010: 239 [Ak 7: 127]) That means human are high-level animals, people can achieve what they want to do and can lead others and even animals，but animals can never be leaders. Such as, people beings have their own ideas and have goals and ideals for their own lives. Also, the goal is the driving force for us to move forward. However, Animals may not have their own thoughts and goals in life. Even some low-level animals can't identify their children like fish. When we determine whether a particular desire should be used as a reason for action, we are undergoing a deeper reflection, which requires a recognizable description of ourselves. This recognizable description of our own actual identity is a necessary moral because without it we cannot regard our life as a worthwhile life or our behavior is worth doing.

Second, human beings have more rights and have their own judgments about things. Rousseau's social contract theory tells us that the establishment of a state machine depends on each individual's transfer of a part of the rights to give the state protection of their remaining rights, authorizing the state to act as a violent machine to punish those who violate their remaining rights. Rousseau compares the relationship between the individual and the state of society as a contractual relationship, arguing that people give up a small portion of their rights in exchange for more freedom (that is, rights). But people who have too many rights are not necessarily good things. Rights give people a great temptation, and legitimate use rights can protect themselves and promote social harmony, wrong use rights can lead people to make mistakes and even be sanctioned by law. For example, if a person uses his own rights to build a park for citizens, this is a good thing for the people. But if you use the right to misappropriate public funds, this is a criminal act. In order to avoid this, people have developed a legal system. The law is to protect human rights to the greatest extent, not to limit human rights. The law also adds obligations to protect people's rights. Only if you have the obligation not to kill, the right to life and health of others can be protected. In animal’s kingdom, they have no clear rights and no laws. They follow the principle of natural elimination, such as they need to occupy their own territory. If their territory is invaded, they will wage a fierce war instead of negotiating like humans.

Third, human have purpose consciousness. Human exist and develop as the sum of all social relations. If human beings want to exist and develop, they must solve problems such as food, clothing, housing and transportation. To solve these problems, we must work, and we must form a certain social relationship. Then, the purpose consciousness of human beings is determined by the social relations of human beings. The consciousness of human beings is the product of society at the beginning. The consciousness of modern people and future people is still the product of society. Therefore, the purpose consciousness is due to people forming certain social relations. For example, now more and more people want life to be more convenient, which accelerates the development of science and technology. Many people use their mobile phones anytime, anywhere, use their mobile phones to view news and emails, relax with their mobile phones, and navigate home with their mobile phones. The motivation for people to innovate when life is convenient is also the purpose consciousness of people, this kind of consciousness will make our society progress. For animal’s world, animal is hard to have purpose consciousness, because they are better at adapting to the environment than changing the environment. They don't think about how to make life better, so their lives stay in the original jungle life.

From what has been discussed above, we will not naturally follow the leadership of animals, because from a biological point of view, human beings are animals superior to animals. From a philosophical point of view, human beings have their own civilized society and are already more advanced than animals. Human beings have their own moral, rights and purpose consciousness, which are all lacking in animals.