Tell me

[Iridium]

Depends but they are elusive and fast, but if you come into direct contact with them they'd rather run than fight.
They're pretty much pussies =\ The most you'd get from a bite is a bee sting like bump that would hurt just as much as, well a bee sting.

Still just the thought of them moving that quickly around the floor or wall just irks me D8

 

[Enemy]

First off let me say, Enemy, I'm not asking until I get the answer I want. I already have my belief on the subject, so I don't need someone to assert it.

Wow... that's like, justifying my point.

I'm sory, but suggestive absolute? Not sure what you were referring to exactly.

OK...

Well uhh... I'll try to dumb it down here... let's see, your question is based on the assumption that all life is equal. While others are ready to suggest otherwise. The very question is opinionated, so you ARE asking until you get the answer you want.

Is it really a matter of moral value or process? That's been addressed, but it just seems rather pointless to create a thread about something you've already decided on. Unless...

Stop trying to preach about this kind of thing.

 

[violent_anger]

How come bears and tigers get to kill whatever they want, but we have to worry about the "morality" of it?

 

[Ophan]

Bears and Tigers go on instinct. If a Bear feels or is threatened it will attack. If a Tiger is threatened or hungry it will attack. If that animal is attacking you, you have the right to kill it. Without market places etc. If your hungry and you need to eat you hunt, but if your killing it for sport then it's wrong.

All life really is equal, but boundaries and food are also important, so survival is the more fitting term of our existence. Senseless killing most likely comes from the idea that we can control the fate of others, Animal, Insect, or person

 

[Tyler Durden]

All animals kill. Be it plants, insects, or other animals, they kill. Are you saying that we aren't animals?

Besides, in all honesty, these beings don't have enough of a brain (insects, especially) to act on more than instinct. SO ending their life isn't like we're killing a mother that has three kids.

 

[shrekdog]

Did you ever take into the fact that ending it's life was the same as ending a person's?

not at all, because it's not

 

[Yannis]

not at all, because it's not

Yeah, you are right. Well, killing a rat is not same as killing a mouse.

Or did I get what you are saying?

 

[Noir]

I've never killed anything intentionally. >_>
Even bugs. I had the same thoughts years back... and I guess it sunk in.

 

[Joy]

Wow... that's like, justifying my point.


OK...

Well uhh... I'll try to dumb it down here... let's see, your question is based on the assumption that all life is equal. While others are ready to suggest otherwise. The very question is opinionated, so you ARE asking until you get the answer you want.

Is it really a matter of moral value or process? That's been addressed, but it just seems rather pointless to create a thread about something you've already decided on. Unless...

Alright, yeah, sorry. You are right there, I guess I did make the thread to try and get the thought into people's heads for them to think about it. Though, if they didn't agree, then alright. At least people could talk about it. Though, would it have been any different if the the thread was

"Is it alright to kill nonhuman beings?"

And made it seem like I was confused myself, would it?

 

[Bloodgift]

I would kill if it had killed before...if the thing had killed somone before I would kill it, but not a human, and if I was to kill somthing I would do it in the least painfull way, smacking in quickly with my hand

 

[Enemy]

Meh, I don't even remember why it bothered me in the first place. Morals are a complicated thing. I don't like them.

 

[Hidden]

My question was more directed in the moral value that is it right just because one is biologically different than us. The fact that bambi is different than me, and my brother, doesn't matter, our essence of life is what connects us as beings able to be compared and related. You know that.

It is excellent to come to agreement, but there is a point that I think still needs to be defined more clearly. The difference addressed in the moral question is not biological in the strictest sense (that is, I suppose the argument could be made, but it does not capture the idea sufficiently).

The difference itself between you and bambi is not actually the issue--it is the consequence of this difference, namely your inability to put yourself in the place of the deer and the deer's inability to put itself in your place. It is this type of interaction that, according to a humanist perspective, makes morality both possible and necessary. It is the potentiality of shared experience.

Now, as stated before, this is not moral justification for taking life that is nonhuman--if anything, it presents the impossibility of such a justification. Because, as violent_anger acutely pointed out, morality is a human concern. It may be that, with that which is not human, we must find a new guide to our interactions.

If you would still connect us to the deer through an "essence of life," I think this is a worthwhile connection to make. However, it must be understood to extend to all fauna and flora--and within this broad interconnection, the 'taking' of life is absolutely a fundamental fact. (I place 'taking' in scare quotes because I'm uncertain that the term really fits at the level we're discussing).

 

[violent_anger]

I got mentioned in a post by Hidden. Seriously best day ever.

Bears and Tigers go on instinct. If a Bear feels or is threatened it will attack. If a Tiger is threatened or hungry it will attack. If that animal is attacking you, you have the right to kill it. Without market places etc. If your hungry and you need to eat you hunt, but if your killing it for sport then it's wrong.

All life really is equal, but boundaries and food are also important, so survival is the more fitting term of our existence. Senseless killing most likely comes from the idea that we can control the fate of others, Animal, Insect, or person

Blah blah blah. Killing for sport is no more "wrong" than killing for food. Say we don't eat it and leave the carcass for the worms. There you go, we just fed a couple of worms. Or do you think the deer matters more than the worms because it's more cuddly and cute?

Say we take it home and make a trophy. That trophy impresses people and increases social status. Since we are social creatures, a good social status is almost as important as being well fed.





You know your body makes it a job of killing trillions of bacteria? Do they each have a life equal to your own? To a deer's? To a worm's?

 

[Enemy]

I agree with V_A to an extent. Take the male Zebra, for example, which is instinctively obsessed with maintaining a singular gene pool within its herd. I just saw a video the other day depicting a Zebra killing a baby Zebra because Zebra #A knew Zebra #B was not his son.

Humans can be, but aren't usually solitary creatures. To this end they could be seen as a type of "super-organism" like an ant colony or bee hive, working together to improve rather than survive, but because they don't entirely depend on one another they can't be properly classed this way. Still, the basic premise is a social one, and the social spectrum takes living for social creatures to another, more complicated level, where it can be included among the necessities for living under certain circumstances.

Of course, I wouldn't say it was instinctual like the Zebra... but it operates in a similar manner.

 

[Ophan]

I got mentioned in a post by Hidden. Seriously best day ever.

Blah blah blah. Killing for sport is no more "wrong" than killing for food. Say we don't eat it and leave the carcass for the worms. There you go, we just fed a couple of worms. Or do you think the deer matters more than the worms because it's more cuddly and cute?

Worms can easily find food on a daily basis, why do you think so many survive unless caught by birds, and etc. While its easy to say that, a dear poses no threat to you, and you just kill it for sport deeming a fate you yourself created.

Say we take it home and make a trophy. That trophy impresses people and increases social status. Since we are social creatures, a good social status is almost as important as being well fed.

Like you said Socialism is almost as important as being fed. Taking home an animal for a trophy is fine, but usually more personal. Not everyone likes it so it only appeals to few who feel that they did good.

You know your body makes it a job of killing trillions of bacteria? Do they each have a life equal to your own? To a deer's? To a worm's?

your body naturally kills bacteria to protect itself. You should know that unless you like to have a cold or anything much worse to attack your body

 

[SiiNz]

Well, I've never killed before.
I bet the people that do kill though, do it cause they have nothing better in there sad life to do.

 

[Electropop]

Death is Death no matter how you look upon it.


Sometimes it may be an accident. And others its on purpose. Death is a sad painful thing for anything but Life goes in fact go on.

Why we kill? I ask that question everyday. Perhaps its Revenge perhaps that person who did the killing think the other should never live. Or maybe we are corrupted that we have to kill to make things right. Who knows.

Humans are fucked up creatures.

 

[Rabello]

Why do you kill?

Did you ever take into the fact that ending it's life was the same as ending a person's?

It's not.

Comparing human lives to the lives of some other animal is degrading towards humanity.

 

[Vayne Mechanics]

Well not really. The life of another animal to one animal is either resources or a threat. We see them in a similar, but more intellectual way.

That's why I love being asian :C We kill shit, and then we eat it even if it is a dog. I want to eat dog one day.

 

[Ip Man]

Well, I've never killed before.
I bet the people that do kill though, do it cause they have nothing better in there sad life to do.

So those who hunt for survival have nothing better to do with their life?