The belief that animals exist to serve humans is a narrative so deeply ingrained in our culture that it often escapes a critical look. This destructive perspective underpins practices of animal exploitation and unnecessary killing, allowing them to persist unchallenged. In today’s world, however, advancements and alternatives have made animal use increasingly unnecessary, yet convincing people of this remains a challenge. Despite the growing body of evidence highlighting the moral implications of animal exploitation, facts alone seem to fail in changing minds. To understand why, we must explore the emotional, psychological, and cultural forces that shape human behavior.
Emotion Over Reason
Humans, despite their capacity for reason, make decisions largely based on emotions rather than facts. Neuroscientific research, such as Antonio Damasio’s “somatic marker hypothesis“, reveals that emotions play a crucial role in guiding decisions, often overriding purely rational analysis. This tendency is further amplified by instincts that prioritize social unity over intellectual reasoning. Evolutionary psychologists have noted that maintaining harmony within one’s group—or “tribe”—was historically vital for survival, and this instinct remains deeply rooted in modern behavior. It is often safer to align with the beliefs rooted in one’s culture and tradition, even when those beliefs are factually incorrect, than to risk social isolation by questioning them. Experiments in social psychology, like Solomon Asch’s “conformity studies“, demonstrate how individuals frequently conform to group opinions, even at the expense of factual accuracy, to avoid standing out or being ostracized.
The Belief in Human Supremacy
Central to the resistance against change is the deeply held belief in human supremacy—the idea that humans are inherently superior to other species and that animals exist solely to benefit humanity. This human-centric worldview frames animals as resources to be exploited for food, labor, entertainment, and other purposes, rather than as sentient beings with intrinsic value.
This perspective has been reinforced by centuries of cultural, religious, and historical narratives. These narratives often portray humans as stewards or masters of the earth, creating a moral justification for the use—and abuse—of animals. This belief system positions animals as subservient to humans, perpetuating the notion that their existence is defined by how they can serve human needs or desires.
Defending this belief often involves arguments of tradition, necessity, or natural order. Many claim that humans have always relied on animals and that this dependence is simply a part of nature. Others appeal to human intelligence or dominance as evidence of a supposed entitlement to exploit other species. These justifications, while flawed, serve to shield individuals from the moral discomfort of questioning their actions and protect the underlying belief system.
When confronted with the progressive idea that animals are not here to be enslaved or exploited, these beliefs are fiercely defended. This resistance is not merely intellectual but deeply emotional, as it challenges core aspects of identity, worldview, and cultural identity.
Protecting the Worldview
Human brains are wired to protect their worldview and sense of identity. Research in psychology, such as studies on worldview defense, demonstrates how individuals react defensively when their foundational beliefs are challenged. This defensive mechanism perceives conflicting information as a threat, activating responses similar to those triggered by physical danger. As a result, engaging in intelligent debate under such conditions becomes nearly impossible.
The Backfire Effect
The backfire effect is a psychological phenomenon where attempts to correct misinformation can unintentionally reinforce the original belief. Research by Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler, as discussed in JSTOR Daily, demonstrates how challenging deeply held worldviews often triggers a defensive response, making individuals more resistant to change.
The Role of Empathy
Empathy plays a crucial role in bridging the gap between deeply ingrained beliefs and the recognition of animal exploitation and suffering. However, institutional systems and cultural narratives, including those rooted in scriptures, have historically reinforced a human-centric worldview. Many religious texts and traditions emphasize humanity’s dominion over nature, framing animals as resources for human use rather than beings with intrinsic value. This perspective has contributed to a profound desensitization toward animal suffering, fostering an emotional and moral distance over generations.
A Path Forward
To challenge the destructive belief in human supremacy and foster change, it is crucial to address the cultural beliefs that underpin this perspective. These deeply held beliefs often provide a sense of identity and belonging, making them resistant to change. Building a sense of shared understanding is key. By finding common ground and communicating as part of the same cultural identity, it becomes possible to engage in constructive dialogue that acknowledges these beliefs without endorsing them.
Promoting compassion is equally essential to counteract the emotional and moral distance created by cultural narratives that devalue animals. Societies must critically examine these ingrained beliefs and work to replace them with more inclusive and compassionate perspectives. Only by dismantling the psychological and cultural barriers that defend these beliefs can we move toward a future that respects the rights and intrinsic value of all living beings.
Recommended Reads: The Psychology Behind ‘Plants Feel Pain Too’: A Deep Dive Into Cognitive Deflection
