[Arekkusu]

Great, up against the wall everyone, we'll start with the hippies

[RyanT]

(Original post by Craig_D)
I think you could make an argument that the animal kingdom would be better off without humans, but then it would also be better off without mosquitoes. I don't think we really have to justify our existence; nature is one giant fight for survival, we're just a lot more capable of doing massive damage than sharks, bears and crocodiles. At least however we are the one animal that is capable of guilt and a conscience about any damage that we do; sharks chomp through surfers and don't (and can't) really give a crap.

Keep telling yourself that, but you're very much mistaken.

@OP
Please don't insult philosophy with such ****. No reasoned or logical argument, the whole post is a non-sequitur from the start.

[Rational Thinker]

Craig_D
I think you could make an argument that the animal kingdom would be better off without humans, but then it would also be better off without mosquitoes. I don't think we really have to justify our existence; nature is one giant fight for survival, we're just a lot more capable of doing massive damage than sharks, bears and crocodiles. At least however we are the one animal that is capable of guilt and a conscience about any damage that we do; sharks chomp through surfers and don't (and can't) really give a crap.


Really you are that arrogant no other animals have a conscience? Most animals have a conscience and yes we do have to justify our existence. All other animals lived in a balance in which not one species got too big or too small, until parasetic humans came along.

[Rational Thinker]

@OP
Please don't insult philosophy with such ****. No reasoned or logical argument, the whole post is a non-sequitur from the start.

Ad hominum alert. Angry because I have pointed out the truth as I said earlier people are viruses with shoes.

[Friar Chris]

My allegiance in such philosophical terms is to humanity, not to a conceptual Earth as an independent entity. Of course the latter is necessary for the survival of the former, but I would not sacrifice the former for the sake of saving the latter...

[Forget that]

You been reading to much D.H Lawrence mate, all this anti-industrialization is getting to your head

[Craig_D]

(Original post by RyanT)

Keep telling yourself that, but you're very much mistaken.

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
Really you are that arrogant no other animals have a conscience? Most animals have a conscience and yes we do have to justify our existence. All other animals lived in a balance in which not one species got too big or too small, until parasetic humans came along.

Why do both of you immediately assume that I'm not open to being disagreed with?

I suppose, yes, on balance chimpanzees and certain dolphins do certainly appear capable of a conscience, maybe even dogs. I'm divided on how developed that conscience is though, given that certain chimpanzees have been known to suddenly turn aggressive and beat half to death people they've known for decades.

[Nick100]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
Does anyone else think the Earth would be far better off without humans? No other species does horrible things such as industrialising no other species build hideous nuclear weapons. No other species follow religions the majority of which are hateful monotheistic religions more than polytheistic. I think its fair to say humanity is a virus with shoes.

Who would be better off? Earth is a ball of rock and metal and wild animals live crappy lives anyway. Replacing animals with humans is a good thing.

And without humans what will happen when the sun finally runs out of fuel? All life will be destroyed if we don't save it by going into space; we are the only hope for life to survive the destruction of Earth.

[Rational Thinker]

You been reading to much D.H Lawrence mate, all this anti-industrialization is getting to your head

Name one benefit of industrialisation? It causes pollution, allows easier oppressing of workers and is generally crappy.

[Rational Thinker]

given that certain chimpanzees have been known to suddenly turn aggressive and beat half to death people they've known for decades.

When people bother them and annoy them yes they do like anyone would.

[Ajibola]

It would be a bit boring don't you think?

[Nick100]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
All other animals lived in a balance in which not one species got too big or too small, until parasetic humans came along.

That just isn't true; species rise and fall all the time. And humans are no more "parasitic" than any other heterotrophic species.

[blu tack]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
What is 'better' for the Earth though? The only things you could come up with are framed in human terms- less pollution or more forests or whatever. Why would that matter for the Earth?

How about because less pollution means less damage to the Earth. And more forests = more habitats and also trees reduce the amount of harmful gasses.

What does damage mean to the Earth? To the animals, maybe it means something, but harmful gases are only harmful to living things, not rocks and dirt.

[Craig_D]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
When people bother them and annoy them yes they do like anyone would.

Sometimes yes, other times the attacks are random. Certain chimpanzees (like Travis) seem to just have a violent and malicious streak, but then I'm taking into account that some people do too, which is why I said that I was divided.

[Nick100]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
You been reading to much D.H Lawrence mate, all this anti-industrialization is getting to your head

Name one benefit of industrialisation? It causes pollution, allows easier oppressing of workers and is generally crappy.

How about the mass production of luxury goods and the gigantic increase in the efficiency of labour? Workers are not more oppressed now than when they couldn't afford to light their houses at night. In 1800 it would take six hours on the average British wage to light a room in one's house for an hour. It now takes half a second to achieve the same goal.

[RyanT]

(Original post by Craig_D)
Why do both of you immediately assume that I'm not open to being disagreed with?

I suppose, yes, on balance chimpanzees and certain dolphins do certainly appear capable of a conscience, maybe even dogs. I'm divided on how developed that conscience is though, given that certain chimpanzees have been known to suddenly turn aggressive and beat half to death people they've known for decades.

Humans are known for doing the same thing.

[Craig_D]

(Original post by RyanT)
Humans are known for doing the same thing.

As I acknowledged in my next post:

(Original post by Craig_D)
Sometimes yes, other times the attacks are random. Certain chimpanzees (like Travis) seem to just have a violent and malicious streak, but then I'm taking into account that some people do too, which is why I said that I was divided.

[Rational Thinker]

How about the mass production of luxury goods and the gigantic increase in the efficiency of labour? Workers are not more oppressed now than when they couldn't afford to light their houses at night. In 1800 it would take six hours on the average British wage to light a room in one's house for an hour. It now takes half a second to achieve the same goal.

Luxury goods have made people weak and decadent. Because of industrialisation the average person is a fat oxygen thief. Also the living conditions. Provided there wasn't an outbreak of disease people lived fairly long lives before industrialisation. Then when industrialisation happened living conditions went way way down.

To Craig D Chimps attack people because one people make the retarded decision to make them pets instead of letting them live in the wild. And two people are generally annoying most people deserve a good smack.

[Rational Thinker]

What does damage mean to the Earth? To the animals, maybe it means something, but harmful gases are only harmful to living things, not rocks and dirt.

Harmful gasses cause global warming which causes changes in the Earth which can damage the earth surface.

[Rational Thinker]

That just isn't true; species rise and fall all the time. And humans are no more "parasitic" than any other heterotrophic species.

Yes they are Humans exploit other animals, exploit natural resources and are generally greedy compare them to a Orangutan which works hard to get its food. As a result of not working hard people are decadant and selfish.