| Abstract |
Zoophilia, unlike bestiality encloses emotional and sexual attraction with or without sexual intercourse. These anthropocentric attitudes belong to paraphilias, which are considered to be mental disorders, socially reprehensible and in most cases, legally condemnable. From another point of view, it is important to observe, study and analyse nature and try to understand sexual attraction from the animal side. Ethology and animal psychology show that there is a distinct behaviour in each species, ability to social bond development, communication and emotions that argue for the existence of some kind of moral value. Hybridization, defined as the reproduction between different species, shows significant evolutionary dynamics. Mating between different species, may not be as eccentric as it seems, but it could be the hidden secret of evolution. Taking into account as ethical criteria the life and evolution of the species, a quantification of moral value for each species is proposed, according to the position level occupied in the Darwinian evolution tree. These moral values do not vary within the same species, but are graded from species to species. Moral animal communities are as many and the different species. This creates a value tree analogous to Darwin's evolution tree. Human race that stands at the top of the value tree has ensured the highest value, the intrinsic value.
The contrivance of value tree avoids anthropomorphism. The quantification of moral value by species, implicates mechanomorphism, while the use of critical thinking, such as the objective scientific tasks of evolution, enlists value tree into critical mechanomorphism. The theory of the value tree approaches the theory of Regan, but it avoids its anthropomorphism, as it does not give moral rights to animals (a word definition that concerns only man) and proposes human supremacy not unjustified but based on the scientific facts of evolution.
Although reproduction between two different species under conditions of liberty could be ethically accepted, zoophilia, despite the expression of a specific kind of love and affection for the animals, cannot be ethically accepted, because the animal is unable to consent to the action. Bestiality, as a kind of maltreatment and violence, is ethically despicable.
|
Ζωοφιλία, κτηνοβασία και ηθικη θέση των ζώων
