Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Audrey Kitagawa: I don't think it's a matter of right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life-forms. I think human beings often presume that human life is more valuable than other life-forms possibly because we relate to life-forms with which we can communicate with to have more significance in our ability to relate to them. Like for example, human beings relating to each other may have more significance than our being able -- our inability to talk to trees or rocks for example. But I don't believe that these other life-forms are less valuable. I think it is well recognized that every creature in creation has its role to play and has importance in any ecosystem in which it exists. So while we may consider insects to be pests to us, they play a very important role in being able to help the whole ecological life-form sustain itself as well as to continue to maintain itself. So in all aspects, life, whether in human form or non-human form, whether in a plant or animal or other kingdoms, would be considered to be very valuable. I think this whole aspect of man having been given dominion over the earth may create this presumption of our greater value or superiority in a way, but I think that that would be an incorrect presumption for us to have. Is it our right to be able to claim greater value over others, other life-forms? No. We don't have that right.

by Audrey Kitagawa

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Benjamin Fahrer: That man from Israel says yes. Do we have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life forms? Inside, I say no. We are a part of nature and if we see our place within nature and that every life is supporting and intricately inter-connected with each other. Then, we’ll see all life is valuable. We will see that redwood tree, that redwood forest, the birds, the plants, the animals as a valuable contribution to our own existence. As my brother next to me says, it’s dangerous to consider. It's dangerous to consider our lives more valuable than others because then we are separate ourselves from nature. Of course, we are human, we value what we know and what we are, so the other question about egoism being the cause of human failure. It’s the ego that says we are more valuable than all of life that we are different and divine. If we connect the two, we connect the two and see that we are part of the divine and a part of life. Then you'll see all life is valuable. All life is valuable and sacred.

by Benjamin Fahrer

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Benson Venegas: It's not a right, of, of right - it's not a matter of right or choice. I think one of the aspects that really strike me, that we're using it in the wrong way, is that there's a strong myth or belief that God give us the will and the power to make use of the resources and nature according to our will. The point is, that, this right, it's not a right. Is the way that we should be - the message there is that we should have the wisdom to have – to use things in the proper way. I guess I'm gonna give an example. Take of something - of somebody, for a moment, that lives in the last remaining tropical forest where you have endemic species of insect. And this person has to grow corn to give - to feed his kids. And at the same point, at the same area, there is a insect that probably is the last remaining population of that insect. Which would be the choice? Of course, people would decide that the best thing is to grow the corn. The lesson we learn here is that meanwhile we have the ability to move to another place, or to create alternative solutions, to have a better use of the places where we live. The insect cannot move. The insect live there. So the point there is that we need to have a new approach where right and choices - is not a matter of right, what is a matter of respect to really make right choices, to - that every life form on the planet would have the chance to coexist with human being.

by Benson Venegas

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Beverly Schwartz:

by Beverly Schwartz

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Bianca Jagger: Answertext will be available soon.

by Bianca Jagger

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Bill Joy: I think we should respect all life but there’s a difference between the rights of a human being and the rights of a plant. And if you’re infected with a bacterial infection I don’t particularly think that we need to respect the bacterial infection, we should kill it with antibiotics. So there’s clearly a hierarchy of value of different life forms. Many of us have pets that we love, dogs and cats, and they are beautiful creatures and everyone who has such a pet would I think treat it as a member of their family, with love, with care, with attention. The fact that the pet can’t speak English or whatever language you speak is really irrelevant. Now if it came down to a situation where you had to save the life of your child or the life of your pet you might sacrifice your pet but we recognize that the pet is a very valuable life form. So I think we do have a right we have essentially an obligation to make a moral choice as to some life forms are more valuable and worthy of respect than others.

by Bill Joy

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Bora Cosic: Off course we have to respect human beings as human, and the rest of living world we must respect as it is. Every leaf, every tree, every stone should be appreciated as it is. A good relation to the appearances surrounding us is in each being individual. We can’t value a human as a stone, so we have to value squirrel as it is and not as Hedy Lamarr. Everything exiting has right to bee acknowledged and on good relationship.

by Bora Cosic

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Brian J. Weller: Answertext will be available soon.

by Brian J. Weller

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Catherine David: This is a question that has apparently religious implications. I am not a religious person but I admit very voluntarily that on a spiritual level, the question of the primacy of one life-form is a metaphysical one. It does not even seem to me though, it seems to me, that the question of the human beings today is difficult enough even if it seems to me that the defence and the respect of other life-forms is not incompatible. I myself have always thought that the cruelty to animals was no good sign ever.

by Catherine David

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

China Keitetsi: I don't think we have such a right and we should not, but we do it anyway. But we should be stopped because I think everything that is here have a right to stay here. And that's why each has their own home. They have their bush, they have their forest, we have our other place to live. We have no right to end no one's life. We have no right to end anything that lives, only unless you have to - for food, for example. But I think the more you respect such a non-human, the more closer you will come to respecting the other human being. For example, I was impressed living in Europe; the way they treat animals, the way they treat everything that lives. I was shocked. In Denmark, everything that lives has the right not to be hungry, and this was shocking for me. Consider to where I came from and because of this I actually began to value human beings more than I did before. And even today when I see that person I get scared. I'm a bit shocked because in Denmark the way they treat living things – animals - have made me a better person towards other human being.

by China Keitetsi

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Cornel West: I think there is, for me, no doubt that the life of a human being does have more value than a life of an amoeba. I believe that the life of my mother has much, much, much more value than the life of a fly. That does not mean that we are justified in crushing other centia creatures. It does not mean that we are justified in systematically exploiting the mammals and animals. But, we must be candid and frank about the degree to which the lives of human beings can, in fact, be justified as having more value than the lives of certain other life forms. It is a hard question to you. We have to make hard judgments. They ought to be self- critical judgments that are open to revision. But, when there is so many fellow human beings, one billion living on $1 a day, two billion living on $2 a day, we cannot downplay their plight even as we support other life forms and attempt to protect other life forms, be they whales, be they penguins, be they dogs, or cats. The balancing of the animal rights movement with the human rights movement is a crucial one, and even the animal rights movement has to make certain kind of judgments about a variety of different life forms on the globe. The question is how to become ecumenical, to support as many life forms as possible without losing sight of the dignity of human beings.

by Cornel West

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Dedi Baron: Answertext will be available soon.

by Dedi Baron

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Donato Bayu Bay Bumacas: I don't think we have the right to consider ourselves firstly, you know, more valuable than other life forms; but the thing is if we are going to look at the history, people had been considering themselves as superior to other life forms. And this act of making her or his as superior than others justifies his action of using other life forms either in the development path or in a destructive manner, and this is the danger of it if you consider yourself as more powerful, more valuable than other life forms. But for me, we don't have the right to say we are more valuable than other life forms. It’s God -- God created everything in this world, and no one has the right to say you are more valuable than others. Although, we are to face the reality that people always think that they are more valuable and superior than other life forms. And, personally, I would say we have no right really to consider us more valuable than other life forms.

by Donato Bayu Bay Bumacas

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Dritëro Kasapi: Yes, I think so. Yeah. I’m aware of the balance between different life forms in the world that we meet. But, yeah, I would sacrifice a bear and a dolphin for a human life to save a human life. Yeah. I think that for me, it’s natural. It’s what it is. Human life is more valuable than the life of a dolphin. I know a lot of ecologists would kill me now, but I think so. I eat meat, so I suppose, I think a cow is food for me. So, you know that’s it. Unless it serves human needs, I don’t think we should destroy other lives. That’s an important marking to make, and if we can find ways to preserve other life forms--[AUDIO ENDS]

by Dritëro Kasapi

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Eliane Potiguara: Man and Woman are beings that have been put on this planet to make life dynamic. Life consists of animals, plants, beings, air, water, light, all these elements belong to life. Mankind is not more important than all the other beings, the living beings. Nonetheless, man and woman are thinking beings, so they can choose every other natural life form as their companions. But even as a thinking being he should not consider himself of being more important than – let's say – a cascade. We indigenous people, we consider nature as our siblings, sister stone, sister water, brother sky, brother wind, all are our siblings. For us, the indigenous people, all the livings beings are members of our family. The river is a member, God is a member, he is our father, the plants are our members, the birds are our cousins. So if the world starts to understand this family relations, we all will understand that we are all the same since we all are living beings and we all have the ability to think.

by Eliane Potiguara

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Eliot Weinberger: No and obviously one of the many disasters of our times is the vanishing of the species which is going to have consequences that are beyond our imaginations. And clearly, we have to begin making our decisions in terms of their effects on the other species and start considering what the consequences would be of the rapidly vanishing biological diversity on the earth. I think we have to start listening to the animals more. And we have to recognize that we’re living in a moment of the holocaust of the animals.

by Eliot Weinberger

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Elisabet Sahtouris: Thank you, Silke in Berlin, for thinking of the other species. I’m an evolution biologist. So I am happy to hear you asking whether we have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life forms. Probably every life form has to take itself as valuable in order to get along in the world. But most of them are in a much more cooperative relationship with each other than the humans are with other species. We have been rather arrogant in seeing ourselves as the pinnacle of evolution even though every species on this planet has taken just as long to evolve, to get where it is today as humans have. And, rights are something that humans think up for themselves. Animals, plants, funguses, microbes don’t think in terms of rights. But I believe they are all in communion with each other, rather than in communication the way humans are primarily with each other. We humans too have the capacity for communion with other species and with each other. One of my very favorite books is a book called "Kinship With All Life" by J. Alan Boone, and it's a wonderful, wonderful book I love to give it to kids when they are 10 or 12 years old, because, in it Boone tells of how he learned to commune with other species, with animals. His guru, teacher was a dog, the first famous movie star dog in Hollyhood, named Strongheart, who actually came from Germany, and was retrained to make family movies. And when Boone had to take care of this dog once for six weeks he became the dogs humble pupil, following it all day, eating when the dog ate, sleeping when the dog slept, running, playing, sitting whatever. And eventually, while the dog was [AUDIO ENDS]

by Elisabet Sahtouris

Sep 9, 2006 11:40:00 AM cite

Ervin Laszlo: In principle, we do not have this right. All life forms are equally valued. Obviously, practiced are traders, sometimes you squash a mosquito, sometimes you have to kill an animal that is threatening to kill you. But in principle, we should try to avoid destroying life or mitigating the circumstances of its well being. All living things are equal while all are part of the ecology of the planet.

by Ervin Laszlo