It is called anthropocentrism to the theory of philosophy that places the human being at the center of everything. This doctrine, therefore, holds that the interests of men require more attention than all other questions.
For anthropocentrism, the human condition should be the only thing that guides the judgment. By extension, the rest of living beings and the universe in general must always be considered from the welfare of the persons. Thus the intellectual and moral concern for other creatures is subordinated to the need of our species.
Anthropocentrism can be viewed from different perspectives. Many times this doctrine is understood as opposition to the theocentrism, which places God as a measure of everything. At Renaissance, anthropocentrism managed to impose itself on the theocentrism that reigned in the Middle Ages.
In fact, it can be indicated that the passage of culture from the Middle Ages to modernity is marked by the loss of preponderance of theocentrism and, on the other hand, by the development of anthropocentrism.
While until XV century used to take God as the origin and cause of the entire universe, from then on it began to be situated at the man in the middle. This supposed a new worldview and a resounding change in the way of understanding reality.
Anthropocentrism, however, is often questioned. The belief that human interests are above the interests of the rest of the species or that only man is susceptible to moral consideration is criticized by activists in favor of the Rights of the animals.
One of the points that serve to unleash controversy In this context, we are the only animal species on this planet that seeks to dominate others simply by feeding its ego, instead of its stomach: the rest of living beings do not attack anyone unnecessarily, but rather They fulfill the task that nature has entrusted to them to maintain balance.
Although from the typical arrogance of many human beings, the life of animals lacks complexity In front of ours, we should be grateful to many of them for sustaining the different ecosystems that, on the other hand, we strive to destroy in our quest to manufacture rockets, tall towers and artificial islands.
On the other hand, animalists often remind those who defend the ideas of anthropocentrism that our species does not hunt with its own nails and teeth, but resorts to the creation of artificial weapons: if we really were omnivores, as indicated by most sources conventional, then we could get our own food without the help of any tool.
The scope of anthropocentrism is much greater than the mere displacement of other species on the planet Land, and this can be seen in the vast majority of classic works of fiction in which extraterrestrial beings appear. Although it is true that in almost all of them the visitors have more advanced technologies than those developed by humans, which is why they have been able to arrive from other galaxies, they rarely have an appearance consistent with their supposed intellectual superiority.
The posture known as Smart designOn the other hand, it postulates that living beings and the universe itself have been created by beings of superior intelligence. It is a point of view relatively opposed to anthropocentrism, and one that many scientists accuse of creationist; its advocates, however, argue that it is a much more likely explanation for our existence than natural selection. As is to be expected, neither side can offer irrefutable evidence for their theories.