By Joel Bartlett

In his lecture on Monday February 26, Frans de Waal convinced the audience that apes and other non-human animals are intelligent moral creatures. It is very common for non-human animals to practice reconciliation, such as kissing. Some non-human animals, such as the Great Apes console each other by embracing, showing empathy. Combining these facts with how non-human animals treat their retarded and disabled and that some non-human animals are 98% genetically similar to humans (de Waal pointed out that chimps are more closely related to humans then they are to gorillas), I wonder how de Waal justifies his treatment of animals?

What is the purpose of studying morality if we do not make judgments based on our findings? De Waal stated that morality is a guideline, but he does not practice what he preaches. De Waal keeps his apes locked up in a prison away from their natural environment. He does not ask for their consent when using them in experiments. His actions are immoral and he is therefore a hypocrite. Others have found it possible to study apes and other creatures in their natural habitat. Why must de Waal be so invasive? 

As a moralist, I would think de Waal would find it prudent to morally justify actions. However as he pointed out, most Westernized humans would not eat a dog, yet would gladly eat a pig. Pigs are social and intelligent so why does this discrepancy exist? For no good reason said de Waal; that’s just the way things are in our society. Similarly I would imagine that although women are not truly inferior to men, de Waal would not see it as a problem that we happen to treat them as such. That is just the way things are. This argument could be
continued with every oppressed group.

De Waal makes a strong argument for the better treatment of non-human animals, but does not follow through. He tortures animals for no reason other than for curiosity. 

Even the title of de Waal’s lecture was offensive and oppressive: "Animal Origins of Human Morality." Of course human morality is animal based, humans are animals. Our society has successfully convinced us to be speciesist and believe that we are not animals: animals are animals and humans are better. 

I challenge de Waal and anyone of the Wesleyan community to provide an excuse for humanity’s current treatment of creatures that are so moral, intelligent, artistic.
 

Bartlett is a member of the class of 2003.