Support
Ask your question
Search
Visual Collection
Popular Questions
- Why don't schools teach us to form our... latest post by onurb | 26 responses
- Is organized religion the root of all ... latest post by thedoc | 204 responses
- Will human beings really ever understa... latest post by isoses | 49 responses
- When will someone ask STUDENTS what th... latest post by rwt | 10 responses
- Do you still believe in the things you... latest post by Xokulat | 5 responses
Popular Topics
Most active users
- Thai sean 1294 posts | member since Nov 11, 2007
- treeless 17 posts | member since Dec 9, 2011
- cyberworldukltd 16 posts | member since Feb 7, 2012
- thedoc 1386 posts | member since Sep 10, 2006
- livnlrn75 7 posts | member since Dec 29, 2011
Question |
|
||
|
Do we have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life forms? by easygisi01 |
postings
 
Abbas Beydoun: We need miracle for that which is difficult to get nowadays. This is just proposal that there will be suddenly no drugs more, so the question is naive. People who are suffering from drugs would believe that drug is the only problem in the world, but the others believe that there are other problems which cause suffer for the humanity. Everybody knows that Drug is a result than being a consequence and there is always concern which leads people to get away from the drugs until they ignore the hard reality. |
Alvaro Restrepo: I think that the position of human beings in relation to all those different types of life is one of the reasons of the world crisis we are living in nowadays. There are people who think themselves different, who assume that they are different. I also think that human beings consider themselves kings of the creation and that position make them to commit a collective suicide. I think that the fact of not considering ourselves a part of a whole make us think that we have the right to transform nature in an absolutely unconscious way. In my opinion all type of life are equally sacred and people must understand that they belong to a whole. |
|
by Ana Lucy Bengochea | 0 votes | 
|
Andries Botha: My personal perspective is, yeah, we don’t. My -- Our inability to accord value and equal value to other living things is measured by a manner in which, we are unable to sustain ourselves as integral living bodies within the world, which is physically deteriorating. It’s quite clear to me that our humanity as a dominant life form is losing its ability--it’s losing its domain --losing its ability to live in a sustainable environment. Environment is in serious trouble, that which we eat, that which we use, consumable losses, all these living entities. We do not have a right to assume, because sooner or later, our co-dependence on these other life forms, this balance will shift. This codependence will fracture, will break. This balance will and is being shifted, and our life, our humanity, is under threat because of our inability to accord value to other living things. |
Angaangaq Lyberth: Actually, Silke, every life form is equally important. Every life form. Remember the old teachings that they say that everything began with the mineral world. And then after that came the plant world. Then after that came the animal world. And after that the human world began. So when you and I, we die tomorrow, the animal world will eat us. And when they die they will be eaten by the plant world. And when they die, they will be eaten by the mineral world. And thus life has no beginning, no ending. So to say that human beings’ lives are more worth than the other created beings in my view then we lose the balance. Human beings need the animal world, as the animal world needs the plant world, and the plant world needs the mineral world. And thus we are all equal. Now the human world’s responsibility today is to ensure that all safety is for all. That means for the animal world, the plant world and the mineral world. And when we don’t do that it is really imbalanced. Did you hear my answer? |
Anthony Arnove: It’s an interesting question. I will try not to pay attention to what my neighbors are saying quite rightly. I think you can answer this two ways. No, we don’t have a right to consider our lives more valuable than lives of other species in the sense that we have an obligation to other beings with whom we share the planet. We have obligation to our environment. But, ultimately, I think we do have to make a distinction in the sense that the organization of human life has a different nature in the sense that we collectively can organize to either bring about circumstances that would lead to the preservation or the destruction of other species in a way that has a far more profound responsibility. |
Anuradha Koirala: Everybody has – no at all. No, not at all. All life forms have the same values. Everybody has to have the same values; No, not at all. No, not at all. All lives have to have the same values. |
Anuradha Mittal: I don’t think we have the right to consider human beings as being more valuable than other life forms. And if we do actually think that, I think it’s a real mistake because actually it works against us. The only way we can survive on this planet and I think enough evidence is in and we need to learn if we haven’t so far that we basically live in harmony with nature and that’s the only way to survive. With the climate change that we are seeing around us, with the destruction of our seas, the destruction of our forests, we are basically not endangering Mother Earth; what we are managing to do is endanger ourselves. So, if we think that we are more valuable than the others and other species, actually we don’t value ourselves because if we do value ourselves we would have a different form of life system, a different way of living on this planet so we would leave a very small ecological footprint because we know that we value ourselves and our survival. And the survival of the future generations of the children actually depends on living in harmony with nature, with respect and acknowledgment of other species. |
Ashok Gangadean: I think from the point of view of global wisdom and spirituality, it’s decisive to know that we again, do we have the right to consider human forms as higher or superior reflects again this culture of an egocentric culture form that privileges the self above the other. The self above other people, other species, and over nature, in contrast to an awakened culture that has been taught by our great traditions in our indigenous wisdom through the ages that when we recognize a profound interconnectivity and the sacredness of the fabric of all life, it is highly improper to privilege the human in an anthropocentric, egocentric world view that places the human as privileged above others. That kind of specism comes with the egocentric or ego-mental distortion of wisdom and compassion and of reality itself. So to the extent that the living global wisdom and global spirituality and recognize this interconnectivity and sacredness of all life, we would understand that human beings are part of that fabric and that nature is sacred and other forms of life, other creatures, other than humans, as our teachers like Jane Goodall for example on our world wisdom also reminds us, in terms of the sacredness of the life of chimpanzees and of other species, the dolphin, just to pick out a few. When you see the sacredness of everything as a reflection of the fundamental unified logos, then that kind of consciousness leads us to treat all life as sacred and having a kind of equality. They are not the same, but there can still be an equality in terms of their sacredness, in the biodiversity of all life in nature. |
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. |
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. |
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 Beverly Schwartz | 0 votes |
|
|
Currently video only.
|
by Bianca Jagger | 0 votes |
|
Bianca Jagger: Answertext will be available soon. |
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 |
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 |
|
Currently video only.
|
by Brian J. Weller | 0 votes |
|
Brian J. Weller: Answertext will be available soon. |
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. |
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. |
postings
