The fact that man knows right from wrong proves his intellectual superiority to the other creatures; but the fact that he can do wrong proves his moral inferiority to any creature that cannot.
My Take: Not sure I agree with this one. I tend to see animals as morally neutral, neither good nor evil. A cow that chews its cud peacefully is not good, it just is. A wolf that hunts down its prey and rends it limb from limb is not evil, it just is. A human being can be either evil or good, or both. It's all due to choice, which an animal does not have.
6 comments:
I'm not sure on that one... I could go either way... But I do see your point!
Think of Christ casting the demons into the swine. In an event that an animal is possessed then it can act out from evil.
Vicomtesse, in that event, would it be the animal that is doing evil, or the possessing entity that is committing it?
True, true, DB but just pointing out I believe some animals may be and their behavior is a reflection of that. I had a cat once...long story but prayer fixed him. He ended up being the best pet pal I ever had.
Critters is critters. They aren't much of anything if not hungry, horny or sleepy.
I think it's entirely possible that old Mark was pontificating because he enjoyed the sound of his own voice and the attention it would get him.
Post a Comment