File:The infamous.png

Herein Isaac rejects Utilitarianism (and consequentialism more broadly) and favors deontological views on ethics.

Simple counterargument: Obviously we don't accept that kind of reasoning for humans due to the greater consequences of violating social contract, the utility of rights agreements between human beings, and the aspect of personal risk (which is selfish and not moral in nature); These are all things non-human animals are not part of. For non-human animals, it's pure moral consideration in terms of net violation of interest, which is why we can and must look at numbers of comparable instances of harm (not for lack of considering quality as well).