Chapter 5: Bodily Articulation of the Human and the Animal—On the Parallelism of Human and Animal

The parallelism is immediately impossible from the outset, because an infinite chaos separates them, and it bewilders the one attempting it. The great wealth and variety of animals, on the one hand, and the abyss of spiritual difference, on the other; one is at a loss as to which comparison to make. Is it to be a comparison by class, or to a single animal? Comparison to all animals together of all co-classes bears within itself three absurdities: first, inequality due to excess and variety; second, unsuitability due to the great distribution of spirit; and third, confusion arising from the absurd conclusion by which, first, all animals would be made equal, and second, what belongs particularly to each would be attributed in common to all. Comparison even to a single class is incomplete, because it excludes other animals, it presents the difficulty of selection, and it excludes the greater part of the spiritual virtues of animals, on account of which the degree of spirit in animals is diminished, which is what those of ape-lineage base their opinions about animal rationality upon. Likewise, comparison to a single animal alone also has deficiencies, because what is attributed to one cannot be attributed to all animals and birds of every similar class, so that all comparison is entirely impossible.

Those who draw parallels between the virtues of animals taken as a whole and the virtues of the human person, and between their works and activities and the works and activities of human intellect, and who draw conclusions about their similarity, err in the very foundations of the comparison; and therefore their conclusions are most absurd. But from this faulty comparison itself there becomes evident the superior position of the human person; for it is demonstrated that only he possesses all the virtues of spirit together, which we find distributed among all animals. Hence the comparison and parallelism of human and animal is impossible; but let us suppose it to be possible. What work of animal intellect testifies to its immanent reason? What animal has ever transformed a notion into knowledge? By what work has it shown this? What idea has it ever had of a single object? Or has it attributed a notion to something? When have we known that some animal has judged, reasoned, or generalized the ideas of things? What animal has ever reflected on the origin of its existence and the end of it, or on life and death? When has it been led to some abstract idea, or known itself, or attributed a notion to something, or been led to the concept of the origin of beings? Or acquired theoretical, ethical, or emotional ideas? None of those who are ape-lovers can prove that such a thing has ever occurred in any animal from eternity. The assertion, therefore, of the claim about the similarity of spirit and difference in quantity alone is entirely absurd and irrational, as we shall clearly demonstrate in investigating the rational faculties of the human person and the activities of the faculties of the animal. The animal is irrational and foreign to the works of human intellect. The animal is ignorant of all things, ignorant of itself, of its Creator, of life and death, and will remain eternally ignorant; but let us see whether, perceiving what falls upon its senses, it acts rationally.