Maybe because they are none?Of course, we are biologically close together, in every human being there is also animals, but not in the animal a human. Of course, animals also show social components, show intelligence, etc. but ethical and legal are differences.
Undoubtedly, man comes from an animal line of development from which the genus Homo and ultimately Homo sapiens, to which all living people belong today, emerged. Compared to all other living beings, humans have the most developed brain. Particularly characteristic is the extreme enlargement of the cerebral cortex by folding compared to other living beings. Man has the opportunity to recognize and change the world, so he occupies a special position in relation to all animals.
A morphological and physiological peculiarity of the human body is the permanent upright gait,thus completely freeing the hand from participation in locomotion and thus constantly freely available.
Humans are generally considered to be given a higher status compared to the animal, and their cognitive and physiological abilities are much greater overall.Similarly, animal development lacks the factor “individual development”, which, among other things,
- the knowledge of the ability to fail as well as the non-giving or wanting to give up
- leading into the unpredictability of the specifically human existence
- the human problem of self-discovery
goes with it.
Perhaps this is why we humans are so happy to put ourselves on a par with the animal at the moment, because we secretly envy it for its ‘non-questioning’ identity and its always appropriate behaviour.Likewise, the undoubted!
Because of his special position, the human being is also responsible for animal welfare because of the responsibility he is entitled to.
I quote from a 2011 opinion of the Ethics Council:
“According to the universal understanding of human dignity, which underlies our Constitution, it is shared by all human beings (dignity) and for every individual person (individual dignity). The commandment to respect the dignity of man is reminiscent of the limit and the limiting condition under which all individual and state action in a democratic society stands: every human being must be respected for his own sake, no one is allowed to used exclusively as a means for foreign purposes.In this sense, the Basic Law speaks of the inviolability of human dignity”. …..and further “Therefore, human dignity is a characteristic of human beings, which is not based on the consent of others, but which suits every human being regardless of the particularities of the situation, the place or other circumstances.” see: http://www.ethikrat.org/dateien/…
This opinion was particularly indispensable with regard to genetic engineering and intervention in human life.
In civil law, animals were on a legal footing with lifeless things until 1990.According to this, however, the legislature expressly stated in Section 90a of the Civil Code (BGB) that animals are living beings, not things.
In the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, animal welfare was also enshrined in Article 20a in 2002 and also enshrined in Section 90a in the German Civil Code( Civil Code.
From what has been said, it is clear that man is not an animal but has an animal component.