As a human, I very much believe that we are the greatest animals in this world. I know that some animals are stronger, faster, or more resilient than us, but we have something that none of them have: intelligence and sentience, the ability to understand the world and capacity for logic and reasoning. We have built a great and grand civilization and complex society and now inhabit nearly every continent of the world (with only Antarctica being largely devoid of human life due to its extreme cold).
I furthermore believe that we humans can do whatever we wish to do to other animals, and not feel guilty or suffer any form of punishment for doing so, but I certainly am not cruel. I would kill another (non-human) animal only if it was invading my territory or I wished to eat it, and I would kill it as painlessly as possible, so that it did not suffer needlessly. Conversely, I would not become terribly upset if I saw someone abusing an animal or kill it violently, nor do I agree with people who make a great fuss about the rights of non-sentient animals and believe them to be more important than us humans.
This leads to my question: is it arrogant to believe that we humans are the greatest animals in the world? Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to other animals without any negative repercussions? What does everyone else say about this?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Those who would trade their freedoms for security will have neither.”-Benjamin Franklin
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
Well, it's hard to answer your question, because every single one of the premises upon which you base the superiority of humans over other animals as well as your indifference to animal suffering is just flat out wrong.
Quite simply, it's ignorant at best and disingenuous at worst to suggest that animals have neither intelligence nor sentience. Many animals are capable of demonstrating intelligence through learning, cultural adaptations, building and using tools, and solving unique puzzles. They surely don't demonstrate the same capacity for intelligence as humans, but many animals, especially mammals and birds, demonstrate remarkable intelligence.
The mirror test, demonstrations of non-physical pleasure or pain, as well as tests on the memories of great apes have demonstrated that self-awareness is very much a part of many animals' experience. In light of this evidence, we can be almost certain that many non-human animals have an awareness of self and actually experience the world, rather than merely reacting to stimuli (at least no more than we do).
While no animal species has created what we would label a "civilization," several demonstrate unique culture through their differing social behaviors among families within the same region (I'm thinking specifically of chimpanzee grooming rituals).
Is it arrogant to believe that humans are the "greatest" animals in the world? That's hard to say without a better way to measure our greatness. As it stands, I'd say it's more ignorant than anything else.
Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to animals without any negative repercussions? Without a doubt, that is, unless you think it's okay to inflict unnecessary pain on conscious creatures (and I don't see why humans shouldn't be included here).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing with proxied cards at sanctioned events is good, actually.
As a human, I very much believe that we are the greatest animals in this world. I know that some animals are stronger, faster, or more resilient than us, but we have something that none of them have: intelligence and sentience, the ability to understand the world and capacity for logic and reasoning. We have built a great and grand civilization and complex society and now inhabit nearly every continent of the world (with only Antarctica being largely devoid of human life due to its extreme cold).
There are many people who do not possess this intelligente, either due to their stage in development, such as babies, a preëxisting condition, such as Down's syndrome, or some condition which pops up later in lief, such As alzheimer's. Do they still have this protection against mistreatment other people have and if so, why? Either they do not, or there is some other reason which you are not consciously using.
This leads to my question: is it arrogant to believe that we humans are the greatest animals in the world? Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to other animals without any negative repercussions? What does everyone else say about this?
Of course it is arrogant. Is it correct? Meh. Tardigrades are more widespread than we are and much more hardy. We have the empathy and intelligence to understand what we do and what the consequences of our actions are. That also means that if you hurt any other animal without a good reason, you're a bad person.
Also: **** iPads. *****ty keyboard, incredibly intrusive spellchecker. I've had to retype over half of the words multiple times because it keeps changing them to random words with two or three letters in common.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We have laboured long to build a heaven, only to find it populated with horrors.
I think the simple answer here is yes. We're definitely the currently dominant creature on the Earth, but 'great' implies an inherent value that humans lack, rather than just being capable of dominating other species (if you don't include all manner of pest and disease). You're also defining this superiority based on human values and a human perspective. Why is civilization inherently a good thing? Especially when it leads to overpopulation?
If you choose to define great in those terms then yes, we are indeed the greatest species on the planet. However, not everyone will. I personally think that we're disqualified from being the greatest animals on the planet because we have the capacity for destruction on a unprecedented level though more importantly, we glorify Justin Bieber and Kim Kardashian and invented vegetarian bacon and fat free milk
"History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man."
Are we the most dominant species on the planet? Clearly.
Are we also the most foolish and destructive species the planet has ever seen? Clearly.
Are we arrogant? Clearly.
Our great and complex civilization is one major "polar shift" or solar flare away from being completely wiped out. There are many potential vehicles for our complete extinction, (most of which are overdue to occur, historically speaking, such a a major asteroid strike, massive volcano eruption, or the aforementioned solar flare or polar shift) and I can assure you microorganisms will survive.
As for treating animals as we wish, sure, there's no force to stop you, or to make you reconsider, but the power to exploit nature's resources does not include the right to do so by necessity. Are other animal's rights greater than a human's? No. Morally I would place the life of a human before an animal. But suffering is not something we should seek to impose on other living things, and the resources of nature are finite.
I think claiming that humans are "greater" than any other species is an arrogant claim.
Counterpoint: if an alien species were to arrive on the planet en force, and impose its will over us with superior technology and civilization, would they have the right to do with humanity as they wished? How would that make you feel?
(most of which are overdue to occur, historically speaking, such a a major asteroid strike, massive volcano eruption, or the aforementioned solar flare or polar shift)
Poisson distributions are our friend. Like dice, they have no "memory". No matter how long it's been since the previous event, the probability of the next event is always the same.
Civilization as we know it is fragile, but humanity as a species will probably survive almost any extinction-level event of a sort the planet has experienced so far. We simply have a much higher population and broader geographic distribution than any comparable macrofauna. The odds are that some pocket of people, somewhere, will get lucky.
Counterpoint: if an alien species were to arrive on the planet en force, and impose its will over us with superior technology and civilization, would they have the right to do with humanity as they wished? How would that make you feel?
We have rights and responsibilities with respect to other humans because we have capabilities for communication and abstract thought sufficient to be moral agents. All humans, no matter their technology and culture, have these capabilities; all humans are moral agents. We generally speculate that any aliens capable of interstellar travel must also have these capabilities, and thus also be moral agents. If for some reason they didn't, then we'd regard them as we'd regard a deadly incurable epidemic, or a tiger with superpowers, or a meteor: utterly terrifying, but not morally blameworthy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Our great and complex civilization is one major "polar shift" or solar flare away from being completely wiped out. There are many potential vehicles for our complete extinction, (most of which are overdue to occur, historically speaking, such a a major asteroid strike, massive volcano eruption, or the aforementioned solar flare or polar shift) and I can assure you microorganisms will survive.
There is evidence to suggest that humanity has already experienced one such event. We survived, but barely.
Now we have 6-7 BILLION people.
Unless the world literally ends (as in something wipes out all life on Earth and renders it completely uninhabitable, humanity will survive.
Ultimately, the problem with your question is that it relies on a subjective definition of the word "great." If you want to define that word, your question is more easily answered.
..is it arrogant to believe that we humans are the greatest animals in the world?
I wouldn't think so > but then I don't believe this to be true.
The most successful, sure, but the greatest is definitely a chicken. It came before the egg.
Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to other animals without any negative repercussions?
Yes. I believe it's a big problem cos there are plenty of people who think it's fun to harm or kill for fun. If it was for survival reasons I accept it, but killing and/or maiming for fun just rubs me up the wrong way.
For example, if someone shoots a neighbours dog with a crossbow we all say, "Oh that horrible", and yet it's perfectly accepted to go hunting and killing a pig?
..is it arrogant to believe that we humans are the greatest animals in the world?
I wouldn't think so > but then I don't believe this to be true.
The most successful, sure, but the greatest is definitely a chicken. It came before the egg.
Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to other animals without any negative repercussions?
Yes. I believe it's a big problem cos there are plenty of people who think it's fun to harm or kill for fun. If it was for survival reasons I accept it, but killing and/or maiming for fun just rubs me up the wrong way.
For example, if someone shoots a neighbours dog with a crossbow we all say, "Oh that horrible", and yet it's perfectly accepted to go hunting and killing a pig?
That is because there is ownership involved and it just isnt a random dog you shoot with a crossbow. It is someones pet. To them it is family. I'm not sure if the pig is a pet or not or is a wild pig, but im assuming that the pig is not owned and is not family to someone. The pig isnt cared or known as much as the dog so our emotional impact on the pigs death is inconsequential.
Killing someones dog is as equal to shooting their child. (Probably not that extreme, but you get my idea)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." - Michael Shermer
I furthermore believe that we humans can do whatever we wish to do to other animals, and not feel guilty or suffer any form of punishment for doing so, but I certainly am not cruel. I would kill another (non-human) animal only if it was invading my territory or I wished to eat it, and I would kill it as painlessly as possible, so that it did not suffer needlessly. Conversely, I would not become terribly upset if I saw someone abusing an animal or kill it violently, nor do I agree with people who make a great fuss about the rights of non-sentient animals and believe them to be more important than us humans.
This leads to my question: is it arrogant to believe that we humans are the greatest animals in the world? Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to other animals without any negative repercussions? What does everyone else say about this?
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
Quite simply, it's ignorant at best and disingenuous at worst to suggest that animals have neither intelligence nor sentience. Many animals are capable of demonstrating intelligence through learning, cultural adaptations, building and using tools, and solving unique puzzles. They surely don't demonstrate the same capacity for intelligence as humans, but many animals, especially mammals and birds, demonstrate remarkable intelligence.
The mirror test, demonstrations of non-physical pleasure or pain, as well as tests on the memories of great apes have demonstrated that self-awareness is very much a part of many animals' experience. In light of this evidence, we can be almost certain that many non-human animals have an awareness of self and actually experience the world, rather than merely reacting to stimuli (at least no more than we do).
While no animal species has created what we would label a "civilization," several demonstrate unique culture through their differing social behaviors among families within the same region (I'm thinking specifically of chimpanzee grooming rituals).
Is it arrogant to believe that humans are the "greatest" animals in the world? That's hard to say without a better way to measure our greatness. As it stands, I'd say it's more ignorant than anything else.
Is there any problem with believing that we can do whatever we want to animals without any negative repercussions? Without a doubt, that is, unless you think it's okay to inflict unnecessary pain on conscious creatures (and I don't see why humans shouldn't be included here).
Blue lives don't matter in the slightest.
There are many people who do not possess this intelligente, either due to their stage in development, such as babies, a preëxisting condition, such as Down's syndrome, or some condition which pops up later in lief, such As alzheimer's. Do they still have this protection against mistreatment other people have and if so, why? Either they do not, or there is some other reason which you are not consciously using.
Of course it is arrogant. Is it correct? Meh. Tardigrades are more widespread than we are and much more hardy. We have the empathy and intelligence to understand what we do and what the consequences of our actions are. That also means that if you hurt any other animal without a good reason, you're a bad person.
Also: **** iPads. *****ty keyboard, incredibly intrusive spellchecker. I've had to retype over half of the words multiple times because it keeps changing them to random words with two or three letters in common.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Are we the most dominant species on the planet? Clearly.
Are we also the most foolish and destructive species the planet has ever seen? Clearly.
Are we arrogant? Clearly.
Our great and complex civilization is one major "polar shift" or solar flare away from being completely wiped out. There are many potential vehicles for our complete extinction, (most of which are overdue to occur, historically speaking, such a a major asteroid strike, massive volcano eruption, or the aforementioned solar flare or polar shift) and I can assure you microorganisms will survive.
As for treating animals as we wish, sure, there's no force to stop you, or to make you reconsider, but the power to exploit nature's resources does not include the right to do so by necessity. Are other animal's rights greater than a human's? No. Morally I would place the life of a human before an animal. But suffering is not something we should seek to impose on other living things, and the resources of nature are finite.
I think claiming that humans are "greater" than any other species is an arrogant claim.
Counterpoint: if an alien species were to arrive on the planet en force, and impose its will over us with superior technology and civilization, would they have the right to do with humanity as they wished? How would that make you feel?
Civilization as we know it is fragile, but humanity as a species will probably survive almost any extinction-level event of a sort the planet has experienced so far. We simply have a much higher population and broader geographic distribution than any comparable macrofauna. The odds are that some pocket of people, somewhere, will get lucky.
We have rights and responsibilities with respect to other humans because we have capabilities for communication and abstract thought sufficient to be moral agents. All humans, no matter their technology and culture, have these capabilities; all humans are moral agents. We generally speculate that any aliens capable of interstellar travel must also have these capabilities, and thus also be moral agents. If for some reason they didn't, then we'd regard them as we'd regard a deadly incurable epidemic, or a tiger with superpowers, or a meteor: utterly terrifying, but not morally blameworthy.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
There is evidence to suggest that humanity has already experienced one such event. We survived, but barely.
Now we have 6-7 BILLION people.
Unless the world literally ends (as in something wipes out all life on Earth and renders it completely uninhabitable, humanity will survive.
It just goes to show how wide and diverse our genetic variation is.
Jarad Graveyard Combo[Primer]!
Sidisi ANT!
Playing Commander to Win - A guide on Competitive, 4-player EDH
LandDestruction.com - An EDH blog
I wouldn't think so > but then I don't believe this to be true.
The most successful, sure, but the greatest is definitely a chicken. It came before the egg.
Yes. I believe it's a big problem cos there are plenty of people who think it's fun to harm or kill for fun. If it was for survival reasons I accept it, but killing and/or maiming for fun just rubs me up the wrong way.
For example, if someone shoots a neighbours dog with a crossbow we all say, "Oh that horrible", and yet it's perfectly accepted to go hunting and killing a pig?
That is because there is ownership involved and it just isnt a random dog you shoot with a crossbow. It is someones pet. To them it is family. I'm not sure if the pig is a pet or not or is a wild pig, but im assuming that the pig is not owned and is not family to someone. The pig isnt cared or known as much as the dog so our emotional impact on the pigs death is inconsequential.
Killing someones dog is as equal to shooting their child. (Probably not that extreme, but you get my idea)
Also, let me just leave these wiki links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_cognition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_(parrot)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koko_(gorilla)