In this monologue, Dennis Prager responds to Dylan Sartwell’s New York Times article that claims humans are merely animals. Prager argues that the Judeo‑Christian tradition, grounded in the Bible, makes essential distinctions—such as between man and God, male and female, good and evil, and crucially, human and animal—by asserting that humans are created in God’s image. He cites his own work, The Rational Bible, to emphasize the importance of these distinctions for Western civilization. Prager critiques animal‑rights groups like PETA, highlighting perceived inconsistencies in their stance on animal welfare versus abortion. He contends that secular education erodes the belief in human uniqueness, leading to a worldview that reduces human life to mere animal existence, which he views as both philosophically and morally dangerous.
Chapters
Dylan Sartwell is a self-professed anarchist according to the New York Times, as well as in the philosophy department of this college. Now, his article is titled "Humans are Animals, Let's Get Over It." Subheading: It's astonishing how relentlessly Western philosophy has strained to prove we are not squirrels. Okay, that's the thesis. Western philosophy has strained to prove we are not squirrels. In his view, we are squirrels. We just may have a more developed brain, but we are squirrels. For the record, I'd like to repeat something that is a central tenet of my outlook on life, why I am an advocate of the Bible as the greatest repository of wisdom ever written. It is rooted in distinctions. I make this point in my commentary on the Bible called The Rational Bible. By the way, volume 3, 2 volumes have come out, it's the first 5 volumes of the Bible. I didn't do it in order. I did book 2 first, book 1 second, book 5 third. Book 5 is Deuteronomy, it is coming out later this year. You can pre-order it on Amazon. The Rational Bible. Because if we don't understand the Bible, we have lost the West. So here's a perfect example of an idea that the West is based on: distinctions. Distinctions are a way of explaining the biblical outlook. Man and God are distinct. Male and female are distinct. Good and evil are distinct. Life and death are distinct. Holy and profane are distinct, and human and animal are distinct. Human and animal. Only the human being is created in God's image. Now you can say that's all faith. That's fine. I don't care. People act like that dismisses the argument. I don't deny that being created in God's image is a statement of faith. Fine. But without that statement of faith, we are animals. Why do you think for all of my life I have asked young people, would you save your dog or a stranger first if both were drowning? To show that feelings have trumped values with regard to the worth of the human being. PETA, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, I think the most widely funded of the animal rights organizations, has frequently argued that you cannot kill a pig to remove a heart valve and save a human's life. I had Ingrid Newkirk on my show many, many, many years ago, the founder of, or I think the founder, but certainly the head of PETA. And I asked her, do you believe that we are worth, that we are the equivalent of chickens? And she said yes. By the way, fascinatingly, I thought to ask her the question So what is pizza's stance on abortion? If a chicken is a human, is worth a human life, what is an unborn human? They said, we have no position on abortion, which was because if they were consistent with their values, of course they'd be opposed to abortion. You can kill a human fetus in the 8th month, but you can't kill a chicken? You know how absurd that is? You probably do know how absurd that is. It's another point of "I shall not be labor." The distinction between man and animal, or human and animal, if you're offended by the use of the word "man," and if you are, you're very bored in life. Boredom is a major reason for these passions. If you get upset over that, you have a pretty darn good life that you can get upset over the word man instead of human. Man and animal, human and animal are distinct. But if you are not Bible-based, if you're not in a Judeo-Christian faith, there's no reason to believe that. That's why the Times published this article by this professor. The separation of people, he writes, from and the superiority of people to members of other species is a good candidate for the originating idea of Western thought. Wow. I didn't say this. I mean, I have. I've said it 100 times. But I didn't write this. This is an atheist professor saying we are animals writing it. He recognizes how central to the West The idea that humans and animals are distinct is— most people today do not. They are taught by people who believe people are just another animal. Maybe a bigger brain, maybe the ability, unique ability to speak, though they'll probably show you some porpoise films that claim otherwise, but essentially the only creature that speaks, and that's it. There will be— they will show biological differences, but not differences in worth. So he's right. It is a good candidate for the originating idea of Western thought. And then he adds, "And a good candidate for the worst." Wow. The worst idea in Western thought is that we're not animals? One difficult thing to face about our animality is that it entails our deaths. Being an animal is associated throughout philosophy with dying purposelessly. And so with living, and so with living meaninglessly. That's correct. So we're just an animal and we die like an animal, and we think that we have purpose, whereas animals don't delude themselves. And that's the way it, that's the way it is. This is what your kids are learning by implication, if not explicitly when they go to an American secular school, which is nearly all of our schools. 1-800-PRAGER-776. I'm Dennis Prager. This is Jerry Boyer of Town Hall
