The Lives of Animals

The distinction between animals and humans is a central concern of the novella and the subsequent Reflections. During her lectures, Elizabeth works to blur the distinction between animals and humans. Elizabeth targets two common arguments of human superiority: Humans have reason while animals do not, and humans have souls while animals do not. Elizabeth negates the first concept by demonstrating that science is biased and by arguing that reason-based thinking is flawed. She posits that to be alive and conscious is to have a soul, thus animals, like humans, possess souls. Despite her attempts at eliminating the distinction between animals and humans, the dinner attendees center their conversation around defining the difference between humans and animals. It is suggested that the distinction arises because animals cannot feel shame, because humans do not have sex with animals, and because of religion. Over her two lectures, Elizabeth also uses the extreme analogy of the Holocaust to support her arguments. Her goal is to suggest that industrial animal cruelty is as corrupt as the Holocaust; however, some attendees like Stern interpret the analogy as a literal comparison of Jewish people and farmed animals.

Stern’s reaction demonstrates the emotional division humans feel between themselves and animals and that many people feel they are superior to animals; Thus a direct comparison is highly offensive especially to a minority.