gmalivuk wrote:No, looks like you're the one who has been missing what other people say. I read your view, and explained why ethics is necessarily subjective. We are people, so our point of view is the human point of view. It's therefore necessarily going to place humans above some things that, in a completely "objective" analysis, aren't inferior to us.
I was actually talking to people who just kept answering "chimps can't sit around a fire and talk" and similar after we'd already mentioned that language isn't necessary. You're providing points that haven't been discussed, and I appreciate that. Yes, as I've also said myself, ethics is subjective. It's important though that we realise when we are being subjective, and consider other views as well, instead of just brushing them away because they're not ours. Perfect example.
gmalivuk wrote:You claim you don't do this, but I bet you wash your hands after taking a shit. Many of us would probably agree that, given the average respect afforded to other human beings, it would be incredibly selfish to allow (or especially to actively kill) billions of people simply so you can ensure you're not going to get a bit of an upset stomach. But clearly you, despite all your claims to the contrary, value your own life more than that of these allegedly "superior" life forms.
By what basis do you decide that your life is more important than theirs?
1) It wouldn't be billions, when comparing population ratios. 2) I'd kill anyone who was threatening my life, and harmful bacteria do that. 3) As I've said, I don't deny having different views, but they are mine personally. Ethics should look from the view of the many, not the singular, which again means understanding views apart from our own.
Belial wrote:You're personifying it again.
Evolution, reproduction, *life*, don't have *purposes*. They're chemical reactions. They just happen. Evolution isn't trying to do *anything*. It just happens.
When we say meaning of life, we mean each individual's personal goal to achieve in life. Not the abstract term life, but that particular part. The goal is actually the individual's, hence it's use is correct.
Vaniver wrote:If you are arguing that single-celled life is more advanced that multi-celled life, I'm not sure you're using a useful meaning of "advanced".
In individual terms, they are extremely simple. But looking at the entire Kingdom Bacteria, it contains far more varied and complex types than any other.
Vaniver wrote:A few molecules differ from what they should be, and the pile of flesh that spits forth from the womb is barely recognizable as the same species as its mother. It, not having lungs, can't even get in a tortured breath before it expires.
Did that life have a meaning?
And yes, it had meaning during those moments of life, but was unable to reach it's goal because it was taken early. We're only counting anything that achieves a full life obviously, or otherwise it's impossible.
Vaniver wrote:Or, to address the last point, why must the 'goal' of life be something everything can achieve? Could the entire history of evolution be species trying to "win", and some species have while other's haven't? If one wants a biological meaning of life, then it is what you said, and we're winning.
Are we winning? We're growing at a rate we cannot sustain, we are running out of resources at an alarming rate, and we are far from obtaining any ways of realistically expanding beyond the world we currently inhabit.
Note that I've never said I'm against experimenting on animals. I'm just against pathetic excuses such as "they're not human, so they're below us." And also the abuse of power, something particularly important. We have the ability to control
We'd better get on topic. If somebody wants to get a mod to split this off, that's fine, but there's not really a point of starting a new topic, we're pretty close to finished. Not particularly a win for anyone, but more a stalemate.
Oh, and going back ages now, yes those fish create their own magnetic fields. Can't find the journal article now because it's on another computer, but search and I'm sure you could find them.