One failure has killed us

Our end as species is very close at hand.

If those peoples that later reached the top position in terms of science and technological progress once would have adapted to a religion that had taught deepest respect even toward the weakest creatures, then all developments would have moderated onto al level that can be survived until reaching some kind of higher goal. Without any doubt, the multifarious limitations connected with respecting the weaker creatures, are actually what would have prevented nearly all of the huge problems and dangers mankind is facing in this final stage of its existence.

Now, correct me if I am wrong, you are proposing sustaining the weak, by virtue of the strong? Forgoing expansion, and promoting consolidation? Who is it that you consider the "weak"? The Chinese? and to which dangers are you referring? Global Warming? Nuclear Armament? Terrorism? Food shortage? Poverty? Extraterrestrial Invasion? I need specifics to form an opinion.

Why weaker creatures, and why not other humans? Wouldn't we be better off if we had respect for all humans rather than on the creatures we need to kill to feed ourselves and test vaccines? The more you respect mice the less you respect humans.

When you say "why not other humans", where are you taking this from? There is nothing at all in my phrases with such ignorant meaning, so please stay straight and fair.

Well, I don't believe in letting humans die of diseases because we didn't test vaccines on mice. That's the dilemma you face when you say that we should have the deepest respect for even the smallest of creatures.

Some religions observe the rule of treating everything with respect, judging that it will strengthen the habit of being respectful, will cultivate an attitude. I agree that it will, but I think you can cultivate that attitude while still allowing for vaccines to be tested and such.

Even if you are a vegan, you'll find that most farming results in animals being killed.

I think the religious notion that man is master of all is simply a manifestation of what species do all the time. A species in its quest for reproduction will exploit any niche possible. It just so happens that humans have the cognitive ability to exploit more niches.

We would not be the first species to go extinct because we ruined our own environment.

Jebediah wrote:

@Jebediah:

My knowledge about the necessity of mice for the development of vaccines is not as deep as I could state any opinion on that issue. There are a lot of discussions about such matters and quite likely the scientific representatives of both opposite fractions would provide quite contrary opinions.

People generally aren't willing to pay the money for free range chicken eggs, it's true. But I would urge them to use their extra money to help the people of Haiti before I would urge them to buy free range chicken eggs instead of regular.

One of the primary reasons for habitat degradation (when not caused by humans) is the species occupying the niche are too successful for a time degrading their own habitat and thus the original adaptation that made them thrive is no longer as useful in the newly morphed habitat, thus another species or a mutation of the original species occupies the degraded habitat because they are more fit to do so.

We are in a niche, just because we have dominated the entire earth does in no way mean we aren't occupying a niche in respects to the adaptation argument. Also the awesome thing about cognition, material culture, culture and the ability to manipulate them means that said processes are sped up exponetially. We have the ability to reflect upon the niche, thus taking the randomness mostly out of the equation, while not removing the obvious natural drive to dominate one's environment for maximum reproduction.