Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/10/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] OT - something something and now animals
From: John Collier <jbcollier@shaw.ca>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 21:02:28 -0700

If I may start with the obvious, dogs. There are many stories of dogs 
putting themselves at risk and saving humans, cats, other dogs 
whatever. Good god man they run little else on the nightly news! :-) 
There has been a news story on just about every type of animal saving 
some twit or other. "Why if it hadden been for that cobra I'd da been a 
goner..." If you are going to choose behavior as your proof that humans 
are, well, different, you are in trouble.

John Collier

On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 08:02 PM, sam wrote:

> I believe you are thinking about animals of the same species acting in 
> concert when prompted by instinct for the survival of the whole. That 
> is not the same thing as human beings saving animals by a conscience 
> act of compassion. That we are able to act thus sets us apart from 
> other animals, but in no way places a moral obligation to do so.
>
> A few years ago a little boy fell into a gorilla pit and was protected 
> by an older female from other gorillas that appeared to want to hurt 
> the boy. That was an interesting phenomenon, but it would be pushing 
> it to call that a reasoned response, and is not evidence that people 
> and animals ought to be treated in the same manner.
>
> I stop my car for wayward animals on the road because I make the 
> decision not to hurt creatures needlessly, but I don't extend that 
> courtesy to animals used to further research that aids human beings. 
> PETA has self-righteously set itself up as the arbiter between the 
> rights of animals and humans. I do not accept their determinations 
> because I believe they have the relationship between humans and 
> animals wrong.
>
> Sam S
>
>
>
> John Collier wrote:
>> While the first statement is undoubtedly true, the second is not true 
>> at all; and, ironically, simple and sentimental. There are many cases 
>> of animals putting themselves at risk to assist another. So far, 
>> whenever humanity is defined by basic actions or ideas, these same 
>> things are found in other species. It is better to stick to simpler 
>> things when defining species. Also most basic psychoses have also 
>> been found in animals as well; at least as far as we are able to >> tell.
>> John Collier
>> On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 03:00 PM, sam wrote:
>>> The issue is one of power. There is no life form but man that would 
>>> suffer to save another life form while placing itself in danger for 
>>> doing so. That is exactly why PETA is dangerous. They ply the notion 
>>> of equality for life forms to the simple and the sentimental. It's 
>>> hard to know why they hold such ridiculous ideas other than that 
>>> they suffer from self-hatred--a condition not shared by any other 
>>> life > form.
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe, see 
>> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from sam <sam@osheaven.net> (Re: [Leica] OT - something something and now animals)