Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jerry Mander: Answertext will be available soon.

by Jerry Mander

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jesper Green: Yes, we as the human race have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life forms. And in extreme situations humans could face the fact of a situation where we have to sacrifice other people, other human beings in order to save an animal that is vital in the ecological system and then therefore for the survival of mankind. It’s cruel. It’s controversial. But I think it’s some kind of matured evolution, cynical evolution. And I think it happens every day. And that’s just because we want a new kitchen or a new toilet or a new some kind of wellness in our western society.

by Jesper Green

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jodie Evans: Only at our own peril.

by Jodie Evans

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

John Gage: At the beginning of all human evaluation, at the core of questions about where do we place our interests, we view as human beings other human beings as the most important component of the world. That view, which is easily expressed by human beings one to the other, because human beings have the power of language, that view amplifies among human beings, everyone agrees, well, human beings viewed as separate beings from the rest of the world, from the rest of environment in which they live, from the rest of the humanity – of the life surrounding them, the trees and plants and components of all of the biosphere, that separatist view has led to disproportionate investments and disproportionate evaluations in what we do. And what do human beings do? Human beings alter the world around them. Depending upon value systems, some groups of human beings alter the world around them with amazing power and technological advances giving ever more power to those human beings with resources to change the utilization of resources in the world. So, the older views, which may have made great sense at a time when there were few human beings, now given the weight of 6.5 billion human beings magnified by the force of technology to change even the foundations of life by altering DNA, genetic codings, to alter life, those older ideas of the pre-eminence of human beings I think fundamentally must change. If you think about a human being, if you think about a cell in a body of the human being, that cell in fact contains the remnants of bacteria millennia ago that invaded the human cell, became part of the human body in each cell and live [audio ends].

by John Gage

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jonathan Granoff: We not only have the right, but we have the responsibility to preserve human life when it's attacked by life forms such as viruses. The plague, which decimated this region of Europe several hundred years ago, was a life form, and I don't think anybody would say, oh, people should not have changed their hygienic practices to curtail the spread of this life form. That maybe - you know Europe should have - should continue - should have not developed central plumbing and greater hygienes to nurture this other life form, and let the pathogen of the plague spread, and have as much richness on the planet earth as human life has. So I think not only do we have the right, we have the responsibility. But that doesn’t mean that we should not apply some sense of justice. It doesn't meant hat we should kill and hurt other life forms without any sense of respect and recognition of their value. There is the capacity of judgment and evaluation and balance. Should we rely on killing animals to feed our hunger, when we can kill plant life that doesn't suffer so much to feed our hunger? And certainly, we don't have a right to be destroying thousands of species for our greed in the marketplace. That we certainly don't have a right to do. We don't know why there's a platypus, why the creative force of the universe and the mysterious source of creation itself created platypuses. There's so many creatures there, you know, they just seem so strange to us. But we don't know. We have to have a sense of respect for the great mystery that creates, sustains, and absorbs life.

by Jonathan Granoff

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jonathan Meese: Primarily man is allowed to claim everything. He is his own life form and his own formation of life. Whether the claim is right or wrong is insignificant. It is in human's nature to aspire to higher values or higher systems. But we won't have any opportunity because mostly those who we concede less value to outlast us - and this is good. This is just a game of the powers. But this system will melt. As a matter of principle there mustn't be any prohibitions. Any other life form is superior to us. Human being is the lowest one. There is no other life form that is lower and this is wonderful. Therefore we can play on it and continue the game. Human is up to the total revolution. Human defines himself by his capability of revolution exclusively. If human is not capable to revolutionise any more, he is a slave - a slave of the things.

by Jonathan Meese

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jonathan Stack: I don't think the question is, do we have more valuable. I think we have the question of more impacted. We contain more energy in us. We have more -- and there is no doubt about that. That's just an objective fact. Does that mean we are more important and we can only exist alone? We are so small compared to the sum total of energy on this planet, so that this is all small little beings that we are is nothing yet. These small little beings are incredible because these small beings, us, these human beings, we can contemplate and imagine it all. We can name it, we can take -- we can give or take life in a conscious and unconscious way. This gives us enormous power. That is not to be denied or to be felt bad about. It's to be embraced and to be taken with great responsibility because it is a huge responsibility. And with great responsibility, it's also a burden. But, it's a burden that's like such a gift. What a gift to have that power to be able to be conscious of consciousness. I love that kind of power that comes with knowing and being able to -- just to be able to be alive. I don't feel bad about that fact. I just feel bad about what we do with the power that we have. We have made such a choice to -- instead of like humbled by that power, we are sort of -- kind of drunken by it, and that's kind of the [big comfort] and the great irony because how unpowerful we'll be. We will [audio ends].

by Jonathan Stack

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

José Manuel Prieto:

by José Manuel Prieto

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Jwan M. Aziz: Some people think that the human being is the master on this planet and that they have the right to do whatever they want to the weaker beings, no matter if the weaker once are humans, trees or animals. I think that this way of thinking is a big failure. Every kind and gender of beings has the right to live. Unfortunately, the irresponsible human behavior will lead to environmental imbalance and at the end, humans will be biggest losers.

by Jwan M. Aziz

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Kailash Satyarthi: Not at all. We don’t have any right to consider human beings more worth than other forms of life because all the animals, all the things born in this nature have equal right to survive and to grow and they have an equal independence. In fact, the man is an animal which has a clever mind and that is controlling the rest of the nature. And, secondly, we have devised our own principles, our own laws, our own beliefs, our own ethics and morals and that makes us more valuable than others, that is not true. We are eating millions -- rather billions of animals. We are killing them and eating them everyday, and that is unfair. We are fighting -- we are really working against the very nature, that is not true. That is not just in fact. As human beings, we should have our own pride and dignity. But, our dignity lies in having dignity and respect for rest of the life forms.

by Kailash Satyarthi

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Kigge Hvid: Yes. Hi, Silke. Actually my answer would be yes. And I think the reason why we have the right to believe that is the fact that humans have, are capable of taking responsibility. They are capable of acting and they are capable of planning. So, the only species on the world actually capable of doing something about it are human beings, and I think that we should do a lot of work to actually protect them and enable them to take action. So, on the other hand, you could say a fish could be as valuable as a human being, yeah? Sometimes it is and I guess it is basically, but this is about responsibility. Who are able to take responsibility of developing our work? Humans are and we will then have to hope and work for that they will take responsibility, also serving the better good of the whole planet and the whole universe. So, I find, I am sorry, but I find humans to be more valuable than fish.

by Kigge Hvid

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Kurt Weidemann: Every life has to be respected no matter if it is the life of a worm, a bird or a human being. Certainly human life is not to be positioned so high that nature is suppressed or that other forms of life are eliminated which have a right for existence as well. Certainly the human consciousness is a higher level of development than the life of a worm.

by Kurt Weidemann

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Lesego Rampolokeng: Human beings mistakenly believe themselves to be well shaped. Human beings very incorrectly have assumed positions of power over all our living creatures on this planet and it’s the most unfortunate thing to see. I don’t think any form of human life is greater than any other. I think the end -- I think the antelope, the giraffe love their lives and have every right to do so just like any old human creature might. I don’t think that merely because human beings are in a position to create weapons that lead to the destruction of all life on this planet that they then should be in a position to stand above all other creatures and rule over them. I don’t care if the Bible says something about men, underline that men having dominion over all other creatures. I don’t think that merely because the Bible says that that is then necessarily true. I believe that every single breathing creature on this planet and every single unbreathing creature on the face of this planet has every right to exist and be important and celebrated as any other human being. It is not right. It’s not right to believe that human animals are to be above other animals, other streams, other rivers, other forests. I don’t think that to be correct. Not only does every single creature on the face of the planet have the right to be, but every single creature in the universe has the right to be center to its own existence.

by Lesego Rampolokeng

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Leung Ping-Kwan: The question of addiction, also I have a problem with this question. Of course, the first part of the question, we can easily see that the question is no, it's not that simple. It’s not that we felt that there will be no more suffering. Yes, the question can be such a way that you can only answer no, it’s not that simple. But then, for the second part that also the question really wants you to go into one direction, like it is possible that addiction is not really about drugs but about relationships. I think we can look at this from people’s perspective. Addiction could be something from the inner desire, not necessarily about relationship of human beings formed with one another. Addiction could be with objects, with fetish kind of addiction to other different kinds of things. I think it’s more so from a kind of internal need than something from the inner -- I called it Yin, not Yang, just starting from the human relationship. I mean it could be about human relationship, too, but it is not just about human relationship. I think the addiction is the big issue. It’s something that will worth looking into, there could be all different kinds of reasons for that and it has, I think, blame more to the deep down psychology of a human being with a thinking conscience.

by Leung Ping-Kwan

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Lijun Fang: It is probably right from the point of view of a human being, i. For example, man may have to kill a dog or a cow in order to foster his baby. Even the person only want to either enjoy life or survive, it certainly works in this way. But, when we consider it from a mouse's position, it can also be proper to kill a man so ask to bring up the offsprings. Accordingly, human's life is more valuable than life of other life forms from the point of view of a human being. Indeed, men have various standpoints which are complicated: sometimes they care about people's lives, while sometimes benefit is the most important thing. When man regard for his own advantage, human beings are usually not as valuable as animals.

by Lijun Fang

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Lillian Holt: Yes, well, this is an area I suppose where we have to question one's rights. Do we have the right to do this? I don't think that we have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life forms. I think that all sentient beings or feeling beings are equally valuable in the eyes of creation. Otherwise, why would they be there? And I think that we do the greatest disservice when we see somebody behave like animal. I don't think that animals would behave like human beings sometimes. So I wonder who is the higher developed form and why we value the human life above all –- I’m not saying we shouldn’t value human life I'm just saying we should value all life, all life that lives and breathes, all sentient beings. I think most have something similar. So I think that's why a lot of cruelty to animals comes from these people that don’t think they're as quite hard as high in the order of the hierarchy. I think that hierarchal thinking gets us in problems, not just between animals and other human forms, but between human beings, too. It's all interrelated as to who's more valuable. Do we have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other forms?

by Lillian Holt

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Livingstone Maluleke: Yes, I think this is the right theory. People have got the right to consider human beings as having -- as being more valuable to other life forms, in the sense that human being takes the responsibility of management. Human beings, even in the Bible, were given the responsibility of managing other aspects of human -- who have got human problems as well. So, it is important that we consider human beings as being more valuable to other life forms.

by Livingstone Maluleke

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Mae-Wan Ho: I won’t talk about rights in this context, but I would talk about wisdom. Is it wise to consider human life, human beings as more valuable than other life forms and according to our new way of understanding the universe in quantum physics, we have an entangled universe and what does that mean? That means that our very being is actually deeply entangled, inseparable from the being of every other organism in the universe, and in that sense, if we hurt other beings we are ultimately hurting ourselves. If we really take that seriously, we will realize that we cannot, it is not wise to value the lives of human beings more than any other lives.

by Mae-Wan Ho