Humans Vs. Any Other Species

[RestlessSoul]

Does the chicken kill the corn stalk for sustenance? Does the corn stalk kill the sun for sustenance?

Only one of these in your example ends a life.

The farmer harvests the corn to feed the chicken, and harvests the chicken to feed his family. The sun will burn itself out in it's own time, having fused elements in it's core that will seed new worlds, light years away. It's all part of the same cycle.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The farmer harvests the corn to feed the chicken, and harvests the chicken to feed his family. The sun will burn itself out in it's own time, having fused elements in it's core that will seed new worlds, light years away. It's all part of the same cycle.

Perhaps the farmer can just feed the corn to his family.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Perhaps the farmer can just feed the corn to his family.

But then who would feed the chicken? And protect her from the fox?

I'm all for ethical treatment of animals btw.

 

[SalixIncendium]

But then who would feed the chicken?

Chickens are able to feed themselves, just as wild turkeys are.

And protect her from the fox?

Why would a chicken require human protection? Who protects wild turkeys from the fox?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Chickens are able to feed themselves, just as wild turkeys are.


Why would a chicken require human protection? Who protects wild turkeys from the fox?

We don't have many wild turkeys round here, nor chickens. The fox is one of very few non domesticated animals in the UK, and I don't think there's any going back to hunting dear in the forest. So industrial scale farming is here to stay, I think. And whether that's grain or vegetable or livestock farming, it needs to be done responsibly and humanely.

Like it or not, we live in a managed environment, and what wilderness is left in the world needs managing too, or it will be consumed by humanity's voracious appetite for resources of every kind. In that sense, we really are unlike every other species; we have a responsibility towards nature which is directly related to our ability to exploit her. No other animal seems to me to find itself in that position.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Does the chicken kill the corn stalk for sustenance? Does the corn stalk kill the sun for sustenance?

Only one of these in your example ends a life.

Let's think about this together. Seriously.

The chicken eats the corn kernel. That's the corn seed and it's the entire corn stalk/seed plant at a very early stage. That corn seed would not have existed had it not been needed for the chicken to kill it and consume it. The same can be said for the chicken. The sun is expelling photons and when it's finished it will die. As it is dying it is getting hotter and in just a billion years it will boil off all the oceans where most terrestrial life exists.

We're all connected and it's good.

 

[SalixIncendium]

We don't have many wild turkeys round here, nor chickens. The fox is one of very few non domesticated animals in the UK, and I don't think there's any going back to hunting dear in the forest. So industrial scale farming is here to stay, I think. And whether that's grain or vegetable or livestock farming, it needs to be done responsibly and humanely.

Just because something is doesn't mean it's right.

Like it or not, we live in a managed environment, and what wilderness is left in the world needs managing too, or it will be consumed by humanity's voracious appetite for resources of every kind. In that sense, we really are unlike every other species; we have a responsibility towards nature which is directly related to our ability to exploit her. No other animal seems to me to find itself in that position.

Humans find themselves is such a position because of the damage they have done continue to do as a result of arrogance and entitlement.

As I see it, humanity doesn't need to manage the environment. They need to manage themselves.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Let's think about this together. Seriously.

The chicken eats the corn kernel. That's the corn seed and it's the entire corn stalk/seed plant at a very early stage. That corn seed would not have existed had it not been needed for the chicken to kill it and consume it. The same can be said for the chicken. The sun is expelling photons and when it's finished it will die. As it is dying it is getting hotter and in just a billion years it will boil off all the oceans where most terrestrial life exists.

We're all connected and it's good.

Is the corn kernel a live, sentient being?

It's good? For whom? You? Or the chicken?

 

[Pete in Panama]

We don't have many wild turkeys round here, nor chickens. The fox is one of very few non domesticated animals in the UK, and I don't think there's any going back to hunting dear in the forest. So industrial scale farming is here to stay, I think. And whether that's grain or vegetable or livestock farming, it needs to be done responsibly and humanely.

Like it or not, we live in a managed environment, and what wilderness is left in the world needs managing too, or it will be consumed by humanity's voracious appetite for resources of every kind. In that sense, we really are unlike every other species; we have a responsibility towards nature which is directly related to our ability to exploit her. No other animal seems to me to find itself in that position.

There's over 500 gigatonnes of life on the earth and only one ten thousandth is humans. Most of the biomass is plants (about 82%) and the vast majority of animal live is in the ocean --70% of the earth's surface essentially untouched by humans. Less than one tenth of the earth's surface is agricultural and of the land area for every acre for agriculture there are 2 w/ nothing on it.

Two thirds of the earth's land is not managed, we got room to grow.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Is the corn kernel a live, sentient being?

--is the chicken a sentient being? Would the chicken be alive if not for the human? A chicken has a brain the size of a pea and it can't tell the difference between a circle and a triangle.

The corn kernel is alive. All life is sacred and must be honored. It is still good for the chicken to eat the corn.

It's good? For whom? You? Or the chicken?

I can see that there is a good and bad in the universe. Many people like to quarrel and say that what I think is good is bad for them. However, most people in the world share a sense of right and wrong and that's the criteria that I work with. Do you believe there is a right and wrong in the universe? Does anyone else agree with you?

 

[Secret Chief]

I was asked if others might be "wired differently," and I offered one known category where that would clearly be the case. Can you suggest others?

Yes, these are grouped under the term neurodiversity (or neurodivergent). It includes (among others) ASD, ADHD, Tourette's, OCD, bipolar and dyspraxia. Relevant to this thread, a characteristic of ASD is lacking expression of empathy (but not just towards humans).

 

[PearlSeeker]

In your personal opinion, are humans more important than, superior to, or better than other species on this planet or any extraterrestrial life that may exist in the universe?

Why or why not?

What does your religion or philosophy teach about this?

I can comment only life on Earth. Science supports the view that no species is superior, more important or better on our planet. I agree because I don't see humans as something separated from other life. It's just that in my personal life humans are more important.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Science supports the view that no species is superior, more importaint or better on our planet.

Important how? Better how? (And note the difference between "better on our planet" and "better for our planet.")

 

[SalixIncendium]

--is the chicken a sentient being?

Yes.

Would the chicken be alive if not for the human?

Yes.

Do you believe there is a right and wrong in the universe?

I believe the good/bad and right/wrong dichotomy are concepts created by humans. In reality, there is only causality.

Does anyone else agree with you?

I don't know. I doubt it, because I'm usually wrong.

 

[Secret Chief]

Yes.


Yes.


I believe the good/bad and right/wrong dichotomy are concepts created by humans. In reality, there is only causality.


I don't know. I doubt it, because I'm usually wrong.

I'll completely agree with you, just so you don't feel lonely.

 

[Pete in Panama]

--is the chicken a sentient being?

Yes.

You may be technically correct if we define sentience as being able to sense surroundings. By that definition plants and amebas are sentient because their able to move fo better get what they need for sustenance. That leaves is w/ who cares about sentience?

Would the chicken be alive if not for the human?

Yes.

The total biomass of livestock is more that a hundred times the biomass of all wild mammals and birds. Livestock would not be alive w/o people.

I can see that there is a good and bad in the universe. Many people like to quarrel and say that what I think is good is bad for them. However, most people in the world share a sense of right and wrong and that's the criteria that I work with. Do you believe there is a right and wrong in the universe?

I believe the good/bad and right/wrong dichotomy are concepts created by humans. In reality, there is only causality.

Interesting. I'd thought that our convo was inherently a good thing, but if you see no basic good to it --other than whatever good you personally can make up-- and you feel you're just being caused to chat, then we can call it quits & I'll wish you well.

 

[MikeF]

Many in the atheist/anti-religious group (imho) tend to indulge in a fantasy/strawman existence where they make up what others believe and then they ridicule it. MikeF, please tell me if you consider that there are some "religious" people who are actually seeing things in a way that can be useful to you, and please tell us if you ever ask what their beliefs are w/o pasting on dumb ideas first.

I'm a little slow on the uptake. Could you be specific as to the the dumb idea I pasted upon religious beliefs in general? Was it my reference to an afterlife? Was that the dumb idea?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

--is the chicken a sentient being?

It depends on how you define sentient. If you ask my Chinese friends, a sentient being is all those creatures that have a brain to think with. If you ask a Trekkie, a sentient being is one that is self aware, a much smaller group. My Chinese friends would say a chicken is sentient, while my Trekkie friends would say no, it is not.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Important how? Better how? (And note the difference between "better on our planet" and "better for our planet.")

I meant: No species on our planet is superior to any other species on our planet.

 

[MikeF]

Nobody knows if animals survive death or if they are going to a better place.
I believe they do survive death, but that is only a belief.

Not to be argumentative, but for me, it begs the question of where one draws the line. You say you believe animals survive death, does that include all species in the Kingdom Animalia? I get why many hold a belief in an afterlife for human beings as many religions hold human beings apart from all other species with humans beings being the whole reason for all of creation. If you personally see other animals as also having an afterlife, is it the same one you envision for human beings or something else? What qualifies something to be eligible for an afterlife in your view?