Extreme?

Good points. I may need to bone up on my Aristotle.
Ah yes, Aristotle, a classic example. He taught ethics but thought only humans have souls, so it was okay to do anything you like to other species, including vivisection. 🤔
 
Ah yes, Aristotle, a classic example. He taught ethics but thought only humans have souls, so it was okay to do anything you like to other species, including vivisection. 🤔
I was thinking more of his writings on the Nature of Man. But just quickly google it and Aristotle may not be of any help.
Probably should be reading Rousseau and/or Hobbes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ahimsa
Ah yes, Aristotle, a classic example. He taught ethics but thought only humans have souls, so it was okay to do anything you like to other species, including vivisection. 🤔
Quite right. Had he known all creatures have souls, he might have written a lot of different stuff!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ahimsa
These days I'm just content with Peter Singer.
 
Quite right. Had he known all creatures have souls, he might have written a lot of different stuff!
I'm pretty sure that many Ancient Greeks did believe that animals had souls. The Pythagoreans believed that. but maybe they were not typical.
 
WOW. you have been vegan longer than you have been alive?!
I was born in Sept. 1942. The 1st recorded Vegan baby in the UK. My dad was one of the 3 founder members of the Vegan Society and was it's Vice President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ahimsa
I'm honestly surprised at the misanthropy here. Any other species, given the power to procreate and consume as unconstrained by ecological limitations as humanity, would also be catastrophic for the environment. The vast majority of our negative impact isn't the result of something uniquely bad in humans. But our concern about our impacts and our efforts to save other species and ecosystems is the result of something uniquely good in us. And the only way forward I see is to foster the compassion and values driving those efforts, rather than fostering a species level self-loathing that accomplishes nothing.
I'm sorry but I see this as unbelievably naive. We are doing far more harm than good. Even where our intentions are good, we can't help our lifestyles being destructive. Agent Smith was right - we don't live in harmony with our environment, we subdue it and reproduce until there is no more room or we have done too much damage then we move on somewhere else and start the whole cycle again. Science is seriously contemplating a shift to other planets because this one is on the way out, and then it will start yet again and so on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ahimsa
Quite right Brian. We will never get it right because of our greedy throw away culture and lack of respect for nature. We think we're so clever when in reality, we know nothing. I'm all for science because it's fascinating finding out new things, but we have to tailor our findings with nature and we're not doing that. When we were hunter gatherers, we moved with the seasons, lived in harmony with nature and respected it. Once we gave up that way of life, there was no going back. That led, eventually, to over populating the planet which led to food shortages, which then led to factory farming to increase the yield. Pesticides on crops which led to the decline of the insects that pollinate them. Now we're experimenting with genetic engineering to try to increase the yields even more. I wonder what we'll do when coal, gas & oil run out. What will we use for producing the vast amount of energy for manufacturing etc. that we consume then! I'm glad I won't be here.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: shyvas
I'm sorry but I see this as unbelievably naive. We are doing far more harm than good. Even where our intentions are good, we can't help our lifestyles being destructive. Agent Smith was right - we don't live in harmony with our environment, we subdue it and reproduce until there is no more room or we have done too much damage then we move on somewhere else and start the whole cycle again. Science is seriously contemplating a shift to other planets because this one is on the way out, and then it will start yet again and so on.

You didn't contradict anything I said, and I agree with what you just said. It seems we agree on the facts and simply have a different emotional response to them. If you prefer hating on humanity and hoping for our extinction go right ahead. But our environmental destruction isn't a fundamentally unsolvable problem. And if it ever gets solved it will be the result of hope, not misanthropy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1956 and Lou
I agreed with everything but as you say, I have a different way of looking at it. I prefer animals to people, they don't judge, so they don't argue! It's not so much humanity I hate, it's what we do that I hate. Hate is too strong a word but it will do. We have so many unfounded, unproved, lack of evidence beliefs and we got to war over them! What is the sense in that? In war it's not only people who suffer, animals do too. I wonder how many aquatic creatures were killed or maimed by depth charges for instance. and on land it's the same. And then on top of that we treat them abominably without a though for their pain and suffering. All creatures have feelings, emotion and souls except perhaps for insect or ant type creatures. I don't know the answer to that. I'm sure they feel pain as to fish on the end of a hook! We are at the root of it all. Unless we go back to nature I don't see an end to it.