Defining Nonhumans as ‘INSTINCTUAL’ is species-derogative and biologistic …

and even vegans innocently/unreflectedly apply this definition, because veganism only acts on the practical but not so much on the theoretical level: the definitions of nonhumans in culturally anthropocentric terms leave no space for a language that enables us to talk about Nonhumans in otherness-appreciative terms.

1. We assume that Nonhumans can’t reason, but how do we define reasoning?
2. We relegate nonhuman agency into a space void of what we call “moral” interaction, but what does “moral” interaction consist of, doesn’t ‘moral’ mean ‘socially conscious’?
3. What about ‘animal language‘? Where we claim that our ‘exclusive’ language system is the decisive marker that puts us on the top of earthly existence.