One harmful consequence of creating categories where one group is unique and superior to others is that it justifies committing negative, often atrocious, acts on the members of the inferior group. Correcting divisive human categorizations (racial superiority, gender superiority) has bettered society. Scholars have often claimed that humans are unique and superior to nonhuman animals. These claims need to be reevaluated. Many have already been refuted. Animals have been shown to outperform humans in many tasks, including cognitive ones. Here we raise the question: Has the false sense of superiority been used to justify human cruelty to animals
Chapman & Huffman argue that the cognitive differences between humans and nonhuman animals do not ma...
Chapman & Huffman’s target article calls for a reevaluation of claims of human uniqueness and superi...
This commentary discusses various shortcomings in Chapman & Huffman’s (2018) denial of differences b...
Chapman & Huffman argue that humans inflict cruelty without apparent concern because of their catego...
Humans are obviously superior, in general, to other animals. This is also supported by evolution and...
Chapman & Huffman reject the notion that human beings are very different from other animals. The goa...
Chapman & Huffman (C & H) might be taken to argue as follows: Humans may treat animals however they ...
Like Charles Darwin and George Romanes, I am quite willing to use anecdotal information as a source ...
Chapman & Huffman (C&H) offer a theory of why we humans want to believe that we are different: to ju...
Chapman & Huffman attack the idea that humans are unique and therefore superior to nonhuman beings. ...
Chapman & Huffman argue that humans are neither unique nor superior to other animals. I believe they...
Chapman & Huffman suggest that to correct our thinking about the supposed superiority of humans over...
As Chapman & Huffman state, creating divisive human categories has rationalized atrocities committed...
Chapman & Huffman suggest that we might change people’s behavior toward animals by resisting an argu...
The answer to Chapman & Huffman’s question — “Why do we want to think humans are different?” — lies ...
Chapman & Huffman argue that the cognitive differences between humans and nonhuman animals do not ma...
Chapman & Huffman’s target article calls for a reevaluation of claims of human uniqueness and superi...
This commentary discusses various shortcomings in Chapman & Huffman’s (2018) denial of differences b...
Chapman & Huffman argue that humans inflict cruelty without apparent concern because of their catego...
Humans are obviously superior, in general, to other animals. This is also supported by evolution and...
Chapman & Huffman reject the notion that human beings are very different from other animals. The goa...
Chapman & Huffman (C & H) might be taken to argue as follows: Humans may treat animals however they ...
Like Charles Darwin and George Romanes, I am quite willing to use anecdotal information as a source ...
Chapman & Huffman (C&H) offer a theory of why we humans want to believe that we are different: to ju...
Chapman & Huffman attack the idea that humans are unique and therefore superior to nonhuman beings. ...
Chapman & Huffman argue that humans are neither unique nor superior to other animals. I believe they...
Chapman & Huffman suggest that to correct our thinking about the supposed superiority of humans over...
As Chapman & Huffman state, creating divisive human categories has rationalized atrocities committed...
Chapman & Huffman suggest that we might change people’s behavior toward animals by resisting an argu...
The answer to Chapman & Huffman’s question — “Why do we want to think humans are different?” — lies ...
Chapman & Huffman argue that the cognitive differences between humans and nonhuman animals do not ma...
Chapman & Huffman’s target article calls for a reevaluation of claims of human uniqueness and superi...
This commentary discusses various shortcomings in Chapman & Huffman’s (2018) denial of differences b...