Only if we are willing to make the same judgment

[keannu]

1.I think "Their lack of reason or automy or intellect could be the basis of our having more.." is implied before the underlined as a conditional. But what does the underlined mean? Such standards like reason
or automy work as such handicapped humans lack those ability?
2. I think "human animals" is weird. Doesn't it have to be "humans or animals" for comparison?

st37)Perhaps some will say that animals have some inherent value, only less than we have. However, attemps to defend this view can be shown to lack rational justification. What could be the basis of our having more inherent value than animals? Their lack of reason, or autonomy, or intellect? Only if we are willing to make the same judgment in the case of humans who are similarly deficient. But it is not true that such humans - the retarded child, for example, or the mentally handicapped - have less inherent value than you or I. Neither, then, can we rationally sustain the view that animals like them in being the experiencing subjects of a life have less inherent value. All who have inherent value have it equally, whether they be human animals or not.

 

[keannu]

I'm sorry, you can only answer 1 and 2 seems to be a mistake.

 

[keannu]

I finally figured out 1, so don't need an answer for it. So could you just tell me if the underlined is a typo or a what the writer actually meant like "humans are also one of animals"?

...All who have inherent value have it equally, whether they be human animals or not.