For the Felis catus in us - Humans are the only universal hunter on the planet. From bacteria to Grizzlies, humans actively prey. Does this garner a sense of pride or shame?
I don't understand quite what you mean with universal hunter . I would say neither and what kind of a question is that any way.?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Certain species prey upon certain other species. To over simplify - cats prey upon rodents and birds, killer whales on seals and sea lions, amoeba on bacteria, blue whale on krill, etc. Humans actively hunt and kill all other life - whether for food, pleasure or self-defense. Would you consider this something to be proud of or ashamed of? I thought this line of inquiry might encourage some lively discourse.
I would say neither but if I had to pick it would be ashamed. Definately not proud anyway. Who are we trying to impress? How can we be proud? For starters there is nothing we did to earn this ability, we just happened to get it and we have used it unbelievably irresponsibly.
We didnt do anything for this planet but to destroy it. So there is no way that i can be proud of what we did. If the animals would have been a little bit smarter they would have unite and destroy us Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Even in the beginnings of evolution there was predator and prey. Why should we be ashamed? Assuming that we are the only species on the planet with conscious thought, we should be even less ashamed. Alot of humans die everyday. We are not completely separate from other plants and animals. If history wasn't exactly in the state that it is presently in, you wouldn't be here. Death is the only door.
I agree that there is no real reason to be ashamed but the concept of being "proud" seems far more ridiculous to me.
Proud, ashamed, right, wrong--these are all relative terms. They are nonexistent without humans to think them. That we kill everything is simply what our species was meant to do. If we were meant to do something else, then we would do something else (i.e not kill everything). But that is not the case. There's nothing right or wrong about it, that's just the way things are.
True. And that is how you consider it. "Sky is blue. Fire is hot." And the others consider it in different shades. Is there an inkling of primal arrogance about being the most vicious and violent species known?
I think Pollux has effectively shown why this is not a philosophical question, but..... Exactly how are we the most "vicious" or "violent" species? Do you mean because we've killed more? That's not at all a sign of violence or viciousness, simply a sign that we have an element of violence and the intelligence to invent things to help our killing. Because we kill for reasons other than food? Again, a result of intelligence. It's not like my fish can comprehend politics to the ends of having a political war, eh?
Wouldn't it be better to forget all the stuff about objective right and wrong? After all where's the yardstick? The better question is simply whether we think we should be doing it. After all it's not like we don't each have a real sense of right and wrong action, regardless of what we can rationally prove about right and wrong. If you see what I mean. I don't feel ashamed. After all we've only just emerged from the jungle. However it's bloody sad that we carry on killing everything in sight on the basis that we can't scientifically 'prove' that it's wrong, or with some idiotically speculative excuse that nothing else is conscious so what the hell.
Isnt that the normal pattern of the TOP of the Food Chain? I bet there was one if not many of dino predator species that killed anything it could get its hands on. Actually nature kills indiscrimintly and is the biggest killer' there is whether it be fires/floods/earthquakes/LARGE ASTERIOD THATS ON THE WAYPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Just my 3 cents (inflation DAMN!!)
Uncertainty I have still not quite decided if the development of human intelligence is ultimately an adaptive or maladaptive trait. I think that it still remains to be seen.
The Bible suggests that it is maladaptive, Tree of Knowledge and all that. Whoever wrote that story was one hell of a philospher and had a wicked way with metaphors.
The Animals are smarter than us, they stay in thier forests minding their own business going about their natural way. Then we come in, set the forests on fire, turn the animals into fashion accessorys, start the greenhouse effect combine it with nuclear war and efffectively kill off not only the animals but our selves aswell. I believe the real question here is not about judging or defining the way we have evolved to be, something that has happend regardless and independently of our individual efforts though our pride will often not let us admit this. But wether we should have pride in the way we have laid claim to the world, even though our ownership is nothing more than illusion. Auspicious or audacious you choose. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I vastly perfer bein on top of the foodchain...especially when you consider the alternative. Be nice if we could control ourselves a bit though.
All other mammalian predators -- perhaps all other vertebrate predators -- prey on the weak and ill of their prey species. They pick off the slow ones, the lame ones, the dumb ones, the runts. They act as part of nature, expediting the survival of the fittest. Only humans hunt down the biggest, fastest, strongest, bravest, most cunning. For example, the elk that have survived by their wits and strength for so many years that they have the biggest antlers. Humans act counter to nature, encouraging the demise of the fittest and the survival of the less fit. Just one more way in which humans have an impact on the world around them far out of proportion to their numbers or needs. Of this I am ashamed.
Yes well said and its all true, I'm glad someone else notices this phenomenon, this is what I mean when I say humans don't work by natures laws. As you said we kill the strong and we can also render a whole species extinct even if it is perfectly adapted to its environment. In the past a species would only become extinct if it were lacking something. I am ashamed of this also. Or at least it deeply bothers me.
