with your level of intelligence i guess you will be the first to die.uritotti wrote:Yes I am, and why I'm shouldn't?!roland wrote:you're not really comparing a whale to a mosquito aren't you? curitotti wrote: I guess you mised my point. until I or we keep killing and eating other animals we cant's tell others don't. it just difference of colture and not more than that. the western word think that everybody should fold up to their values and world-view. i mean ypou cant kill a mosquito that disturb you at the same time when you eating burger and say that those in Thailand who eating dogs are wrong or thos in Japan are bad couse they kill wales.
Who decide that the whales have the right to live and the mosquito don’t?
You? Me? The human beings? Why? because the whales have flash and bones, because it more similar to us? We all have the same rights to live, we all feel pain.
You said because whales more intelligent. Who decide what is intelligence? The human beings again? How? Again just because those is more similar to us then others.
And if there are such a thing as universal intelligence who said that the dolphins are more intelligent than the pigs and the whales than the cows and the penguins than the octopus? It did an IQ test? And if it does did an IQ test and the whale have an better score than the pig, who decide that only the more intelligent animals should live?!
And if there is some true in that that only the more intelligent should live, why stop on the animal? lets do it on the humans either. Lets do IQ test to all human being and decide on a mark that who pass it live who don’t die. And why stop on the intelligence lets say that only the blonde with blue eyes live the others go to the gas chambers.
I have an blonde hair with grey-blue eyes. Woohoo lucky me!
like whales?
-
miro pajic
- mnml mmbr
- Posts: 326
- Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:59 pm
- Location: Berlin
uritotti wrote:Yes I am, and why I'm shouldn't?!roland wrote:you're not really comparing a whale to a mosquito aren't you? curitotti wrote: I guess you mised my point. until I or we keep killing and eating other animals we cant's tell others don't. it just difference of colture and not more than that. the western word think that everybody should fold up to their values and world-view. i mean ypou cant kill a mosquito that disturb you at the same time when you eating burger and say that those in Thailand who eating dogs are wrong or thos in Japan are bad couse they kill wales.
Who decide that the whales have the right to live and the mosquito don’t?
You? Me? The human beings? Why? because the whales have flash and bones, because it more similar to us? We all have the same rights to live, we all feel pain.
You said because whales more intelligent. Who decide what is intelligence? The human beings again? How? Again just because those is more similar to us then others.
And if there are such a thing as universal intelligence who said that the dolphins are more intelligent than the pigs and the whales than the cows and the penguins than the octopus? It did an IQ test? And if it does did an IQ test and the whale have an better score than the pig, who decide that only the more intelligent animals should live?!
And if there is some true in that that only the more intelligent should live, why stop on the animal? lets do it on the humans either. Lets do IQ test to all human being and decide on a mark that who pass it live who don’t die. And why stop on the intelligence lets say that only the blonde with blue eyes live the others go to the gas chambers.
I have an blonde hair with grey-blue eyes. Woohoo lucky me!
you're a complete idiot!
@Miro Pajic and @tone-def
dont insult cause he asks questions..
he asks questions many humans dont ask themself there whole live, most of us live by the rules of the society without questioning them.
this topic is not as clear as many of you think.
some things to think about
there are human rights, but there is no social consensus what actually a human is. there is no clear definition of that which reached a social consensus.
so the basic question is, if we can establish human rights how could we argue that this rights dont apply to other species? cause they are not as intelligent as we are? but why is intelligence the measurement? intelligence is an attribute or a skill like fast running or high jumping, or even blonde hair.
its a great attribute, but nevertheless only an attribute.
there was a time in human history where people killed other people because of not having the right attributes like blond hair and white skin, even not enough intelligence.
today we have a social consensus that its unethical to kill or harm humans because they lack some attributes or skills.
now people dont think further. we dont kill humans anymore because they are mentally retarded, but we kill animals because they dont have the same skill as we do: intelligence. (or we think its our right to do so)
so if you accept and understand human rights there is no logical reason to think killing any liveform is your right !
so we all know there is no way to NOT kill some life-forms ..
because we cant ensure in an easy way, that no life-form is killed, we should at least try to avoid killing liveforms which are feeling pain and are afraid of death.
dont insult cause he asks questions..
he asks questions many humans dont ask themself there whole live, most of us live by the rules of the society without questioning them.
this topic is not as clear as many of you think.
some things to think about
there are human rights, but there is no social consensus what actually a human is. there is no clear definition of that which reached a social consensus.
so the basic question is, if we can establish human rights how could we argue that this rights dont apply to other species? cause they are not as intelligent as we are? but why is intelligence the measurement? intelligence is an attribute or a skill like fast running or high jumping, or even blonde hair.
its a great attribute, but nevertheless only an attribute.
there was a time in human history where people killed other people because of not having the right attributes like blond hair and white skin, even not enough intelligence.
today we have a social consensus that its unethical to kill or harm humans because they lack some attributes or skills.
now people dont think further. we dont kill humans anymore because they are mentally retarded, but we kill animals because they dont have the same skill as we do: intelligence. (or we think its our right to do so)
so if you accept and understand human rights there is no logical reason to think killing any liveform is your right !
so we all know there is no way to NOT kill some life-forms ..
because we cant ensure in an easy way, that no life-form is killed, we should at least try to avoid killing liveforms which are feeling pain and are afraid of death.
I don’t kidding I just wrote a grotesque post to, at least try to, show what are the outcome would be if take your opinion (that only the intelligent animals can live) really serious.roland wrote: you're kidding, right?
What do we know about a mosquito suffering? All we have is a assumption. How can we decide which animal deserve to live and witch don’t just base on our assumption.i said it's the ability to suffer or rather to feel suffering.
Again, we cant say who suffer more. And more than that, we can't kill animals just because we believe that it suffers less or not at all.but all humans are able to feel suffering and that's why every human beeing has these rights.
There is no such think as ethical and unethical. We people decide what's ethical and what don't. every other person, every other cloture can decide what its ethical and what don’t. so you cannot use "ethical" as a justification.that's why it's unethical
Don’t gate me wrong. I'm against it. But, in the same time, I think that the western world who kill millions of other animals every year, can't tell the others to not kill just because they think that the whale is more charismatic than the octopus (who by the way more intelligent).
So now it's obvious why I try so much for the less intelligent.with your level of intelligence i guess you will be the first to die.
Well not everybody was lucky as you.you're a complete idiot!
---
and 'Themis' thanks. the level of my english not allow me to say everything thats on my mind, so you really helped me to reach my point.
I searched in Google that south park episode and watched it (from here:http://southpark-zone.blogspot.com/2009 ... hores.html).
They, who write this series try to say, in theirs unique way, exactly the same as myself. If you don’t have the time to watch it here is the brief:
The Japanese kill whales and dolphins and the Americans says it's abnormal, "they not normal", unethical. Finally this kids come to Japan and discover that the Japanese believe (because of the photo Americana sends them) that who dropt the atomic bomb on the Hiroshima was a whale and a dolphin. These kids gave them another picture whit the excuse that the old one was a fake. In the new one there is a cow and a chicken who sit in the bomber. After that the Japanese stop killing whales and start kill cows and chicken instead. From this point the Americans say that the Japanese is ok now, they normal just like us.
-
oblioblioblio
- mnml maxi
- Posts: 2556
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:38 am
- Contact:
for me it's not important what a culture judges to be acceptable. The important thing is to try to understand the moral consequences of situations and try to work out what the best solution is to implement into your own life.
It's tough, becuase culture shapes views, and this can prevent people from seeing the truth in situations. And if we want to make the world better we need to think beyond tradition and outdated cultural values.
I will agree that there are definitely some dodgy standards in place for someone who eats poorly treated intelligent animals (as is customary in the West), to look down on a culture who carries out a simialr practice. But I don't think it's helpful to make a big deal out of this. If you are really wanting to think morally about the situation, and wanting to suggest a better alternative, it is necessary to move beyond this playground viewpoint.
Of course it's hard/impossible to decide who has more right to life, and how to decide on a way for people across the world to agree on these values. But there are some lines that need to be set in stone. I don't think anyone can geniunely argue against this.
It's tough, becuase culture shapes views, and this can prevent people from seeing the truth in situations. And if we want to make the world better we need to think beyond tradition and outdated cultural values.
I will agree that there are definitely some dodgy standards in place for someone who eats poorly treated intelligent animals (as is customary in the West), to look down on a culture who carries out a simialr practice. But I don't think it's helpful to make a big deal out of this. If you are really wanting to think morally about the situation, and wanting to suggest a better alternative, it is necessary to move beyond this playground viewpoint.
Of course it's hard/impossible to decide who has more right to life, and how to decide on a way for people across the world to agree on these values. But there are some lines that need to be set in stone. I don't think anyone can geniunely argue against this.