Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Earth Is The Birthright Of Humanity

Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2014 8:24:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
We are the dominant species on Planet Earth. And there is a good reason for this: we are intellectually superior to any other creature that dwells upon the face of the Earth. Also, human beings cooperate on a level surpassed only by a handful of other species, such as honeybees, or ants. Despite the development of rudimentary tools by Chimpanzees, they still cannot come even close to matching the awesome power of mankind. Through nuclear weapons we could wipe out all life on Planet Earth in less than 24 hours, provided we were willing to wipe ourselves out too.

They are but insects before us; why is it immoral to crush them underfoot? Is that not the right of the one who wields the boot?
There are those who protest the parasitic nature of humanity, but their thinking is rooted in illogical sentiment. Why is what we do to the Earth wrong? Our actions may have a long term negative effect on those dependent on the ecological system known as the Earth, but if we can find a way to break apart from our dependence on the Earth's system, what does it matter? What does the suffering of animals matter as long as the ecological system which is the Earth remains intact?
The only reason to abstain from the elimination of inferior life forms is because their existence serves some kind of benefit to us, or because their extinction does us some kind of harm greater than the benefits to us provided by their existence.

Tell me why we should "save the rainforest". Tell me why we should fight animal cruelty. Tell me why.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 8:34:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/23/2014 8:24:58 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
We are the dominant species on Planet Earth. And there is a good reason for this: we are intellectually superior to any other creature that dwells upon the face of the Earth. Also, human beings cooperate on a level surpassed only by a handful of other species, such as honeybees, or ants. Despite the development of rudimentary tools by Chimpanzees, they still cannot come even close to matching the awesome power of mankind. Through nuclear weapons we could wipe out all life on Planet Earth in less than 24 hours, provided we were willing to wipe ourselves out too.

They are but insects before us; why is it immoral to crush them underfoot?

Anyone that is truly mighty, doesn't need to show it by steping on ants. He gracefuly let them live.

Is that not the right of the one who wields the boot?

A right? No, i'm pretty sure it is not a right to kill other species. If it is a "right", it means it is fair to do it, and I would say it is pretty immoral to abuse anyone, specially if that creature is clearly weaker than you.

There are those who protest the parasitic nature of humanity, but their thinking is rooted in illogical sentiment. Why is what we do to the Earth wrong?

We do nothing wrong to "Earth" as Earth is bigger than us, everlasting, and we simply lack the capacity of harming it. Earth can not be harmed, not that it cares about the ants living on it. Our existence is but a second if compared to Earth's life.

We do wrong to ourselves. It is not important to protect the environment because we want to protect Earth, but because we want to protect ourselves. We need ecosystems and their resources in order to keep living, especially to live comfortably and to keep living in the future.

Our actions may have a long term negative effect on those dependent on the ecological system known as the Earth, but if we can find a way to break apart from our dependence on the Earth's system, what does it matter?

Why would we want to destroy the ecosystems while we can keep them and still live confortably? It is simply a silly movement.

What does the suffering of animals matter as long as the ecological system which is the Earth remains intact?

The only reason to abstain from the elimination of inferior life forms is because their existence serves some kind of benefit to us, or because their extinction does us some kind of harm greater than the benefits to us provided by their existence.

Tell me why we should "save the rainforest". Tell me why we should fight animal cruelty. Tell me why.

To make animals suffer diminishes you as a person. Empathy and sensitivity are the insignia of the intelligent, especially of humans. Plus we need to keep animals safe in order to keep the ecological system safe. Animals and plants are precisely the pillars of every ecosystem that gives you the resources to keep living. Even if you were stripped from your emotions, I believe you would still want to keep rainforests intact because you would understand you need them to your own benefit.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2014 6:49:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Well, if animal cruelty is wasteful/depraved, it ought to be eliminated on those merits. But if it is necessary for some practical purpose, then I agree with you.

As far as nature goes, I disagree entirely. When we can build self-sustaining colonies in space, then perhaps we can safely dispose of environmental concerns (though this is also debatable). But until that day, we rely on the natural world around us for pretty much everything on some level. Trying to gain our way to freedom from environmental constrains through completely inconsiderate means would be like a fetus attempting to gain a life independent of his mother by clawing his way out of the womb: it won't end well for either party.

This isn't to say that the current trends in environmentalism are absolutely defensible. I would be a happy man if we let every last panda die out and redirected the absurd amount of resources spent on their continued existence towards saving a few acres of rainforest which may contain numerous undiscovered insect species. This is because nature is a treasure load of organic molecules of infinitely variable forms and applications. These compounds act as the pallet of any scientist looking to understand the world around us, including our own bodies and whatever may ail them. These compounds, whose use we may not fully understand, but which may nonetheless prove crucial in ages to come, are why the rainforests ought to be preserved. There's also the fact that they often don't really make that effective of farmland after they are slashed and burned. And the fact that by simply preserving small bands of forests surrounding waterways, we could preserve a large portion of, say, orchid species. It doesn't have to be all or nothing, we can approach conservation with a critical eye to both preservation and development.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2015 3:02:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/23/2014 8:24:58 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
We are the dominant species on Planet Earth. And there is a good reason for this: we are intellectually superior to any other creature that dwells upon the face of the Earth. Also, human beings cooperate on a level surpassed only by a handful of other species, such as honeybees, or ants. Despite the development of rudimentary tools by Chimpanzees, they still cannot come even close to matching the awesome power of mankind. Through nuclear weapons we could wipe out all life on Planet Earth in less than 24 hours, provided we were willing to wipe ourselves out too.

They are but insects before us; why is it immoral to crush them underfoot? Is that not the right of the one who wields the boot?
There are those who protest the parasitic nature of humanity, but their thinking is rooted in illogical sentiment. Why is what we do to the Earth wrong? Our actions may have a long term negative effect on those dependent on the ecological system known as the Earth, but if we can find a way to break apart from our dependence on the Earth's system, what does it matter? What does the suffering of animals matter as long as the ecological system which is the Earth remains intact?
The only reason to abstain from the elimination of inferior life forms is because their existence serves some kind of benefit to us, or because their extinction does us some kind of harm greater than the benefits to us provided by their existence.

Tell me why we should "save the rainforest". Tell me why we should fight animal cruelty. Tell me why.

I want to put you in the wild with the animals that live there for 1-week. No gun, no knife, no clothing... nothing you don't make for yourself with the raw materials you can find.

You see, the problem is that a very few humans have been among the most intelligent animals ever to live on Earth. The real advantage of humans is that we pass our knowledge down, accumulate it, and we protect our weak. But if we take you away from the artificial environment created to protect you, you'd be food for the ants in less than seven days. Like it or not, when it comes to brute strength, a colony of ants would literally eat you for lunch. Learn the appropriate humility. We need ants a lot more than they need us.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
TheAnonymousTipster
Posts: 97
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 12:45:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/23/2014 8:24:58 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
We are the dominant species on Planet Earth. And there is a good reason for this: we are intellectually superior to any other creature that dwells upon the face of the Earth.
I don't believe that actually. More like we're more intellectually superior than all the animals (especially as land roaming creatures) who have the other necessary evolutionary abilities to demonstrate it and put it into practise, but do go on...

They are but insects before us; why is it immoral to crush them underfoot? Is that not the right of the one who wields the boot?
Damm, I'm bad with morality one's... Or perhaps just too liberal in views. I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong, but if one feels an action may be wrong, one should simply not do it for that reason. Be it another evolutionary ability we gained - compassion for other lifeforms especially our own - or just modern societies complete authority over our minds, something is clearly less right about knowing you've terminated a lifeform such as yourself when you could have simply adjusted your foot.

There's still plenty of reasons to justify killing animals of course. Vegetarianism doesn't make sense to me morally as I question why we value conscious life so far above what we believe to be mostly mindless plants... But I guess it's familiarity. We know our own death is bad, so when we come by something familiar even in small ways we treat it close to ourselves.

Saying that, it's not just animals and plants I'd try not to kill unless necessary (or boredom sometimes), but inanimate objects I do not own don't really have a value to me, yet I wouldn't step on some breakable object unless I had to either...

Perhaps to simplify all this behaviour again from an evolutionary perspective, we just instinctively try to cause as little damage to our environment as possible, as it helps life continue and that's our primary purpose according to nature. Nature made a mistake though, by making us smart enough to put other personal things above what it wants. Fight the flower!

Tell me why we should "save the rainforest". Tell me why we should fight animal cruelty. Tell me why.
Because you want to. It's the only reason to do anything. People who tell you to because they want you to. They may have good reasons to share for this, and when you hear them, maybe you'll want to too. I think it's as simple as that really.
Accipiter
Posts: 1,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 4:35:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Earth is not the birthright of humanity, the solar system doesn"t give a crap about you and what you think. The earth being the birthright of humanity exists only in the minds of men, usually the religious ones.
Student4Life1975
Posts: 57
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 4:19:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/23/2014 8:24:58 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
We are the dominant species on Planet Earth. And there is a good reason for this: we are intellectually superior to any other creature that dwells upon the face of the Earth. Also, human beings cooperate on a level surpassed only by a handful of other species, such as honeybees, or ants. Despite the development of rudimentary tools by Chimpanzees, they still cannot come even close to matching the awesome power of mankind. Through nuclear weapons we could wipe out all life on Planet Earth in less than 24 hours, provided we were willing to wipe ourselves out too.

They are but insects before us; why is it immoral to crush them underfoot? Is that not the right of the one who wields the boot?
There are those who protest the parasitic nature of humanity, but their thinking is rooted in illogical sentiment. Why is what we do to the Earth wrong? Our actions may have a long term negative effect on those dependent on the ecological system known as the Earth, but if we can find a way to break apart from our dependence on the Earth's system, what does it matter? What does the suffering of animals matter as long as the ecological system which is the Earth remains intact?
The only reason to abstain from the elimination of inferior life forms is because their existence serves some kind of benefit to us, or because their extinction does us some kind of harm greater than the benefits to us provided by their existence.

Tell me why we should "save the rainforest". Tell me why we should fight animal cruelty. Tell me why.

Are we the dominant species? I dont know about that, as there are many other species that dont murder (knowing its wrong while we do it), that dont intentionally hurt other animals just because those animals cant tell us in english how much pain they are in. We're the only species that judges others based on the color of their skin, or color of their hair, or sexual preference etc. We're actually quite pathetic in many ways, and Dominant isnt the word i'd use to describe us in that sense. If we are dominant its only in the framework of stepping on our environment and fellow animals to get there, at their and our own cost.

We have the ability to think, yet very few of us exercise that ability. We can create 100 story buildings, travel to the ends of the earth, the moon, and soon mars. But we can also eat food every day that we know will result in heart disease in 40 years. We can lay waste to a commercial neighborhood if our local hockey team loses the stanley cup, and we can also cheat on our loved ones and risk everything for nothing more than 5 minutes of passion with a complete stranger. Dominant species? I think not. We may be king of the kingdom, but its actually pretty lonely up here on this pedastol because there is no room for anything else.
there is no progress without compromise"