HeyYou Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I like my dog better than most people....... My dog is smarter than a fair few folks I deal with on a daily basis. (I work at staples.......) Dogs don't bite people for no particular reason..... well, ok, there are those that do, but, those would fall in to the 'dangerous' category. Based on what I have seen, dogs bite folks that provoke them. Is that the dogs fault? Heck no. Should the dog be put down for doing so? Not just no....... Unfortunately, where I live, if your dog bites someone, you are automatically at fault, and the dog is ordered put down. Which I find absolutely stupid..... but hey, it's the government, so, it's not like I should be surprised.... Humans are NOT at the top of the food chain. That all depends on circumstances. An unarmed human in the jungle is food for a fair few creatures........ even ARMED humans have become an afternoon snack for various critters......You are confusing the statement. IT was not, are animals equal to Human, its is should other animals be considered equal... parathensis, to humanity. That means the entire species and as a fundemental compartement of the homosaipens, Humanity is at the top of the food chain! What is the only species that has the ability to wipe out every single other species on Earth? The fact that we even have this capability or have the thought mechanisms to enumeriate this capability makes us the food chains top.Also, the food chain, while were on it. The food chain dicates which organism will consume another for sustance, unless you can name another organism/animal that activally hunts and kills Humans with effeciency and in numbers, im afraid you may have to re-state your arguments because they will become null and void.In regards to the dog concept. It is all cirmstantial. It has been previously said that on this thread that all current animals and bio-organisms are created through years of selective breeding and natural selection. Domestic dogs are designed not to be aggressive by nature, inversely to their wild counterparrts, the wolf. The fact that they can be aggressive is merely a hard back to their orgininal nature. When you see a dog bite someone, you are seeing thousands of years of slective breeding unravel. Also, induvidual dogs will vary. So the capability to wipe out entire species in short order (including our own...) puts us at the top of the food chain? Guess what, if you walk into the tigers cage at the zoo, and try and explain that to him, he will yawn, and eat you anyway. Sure, most animals have a healthy fear of man, and for the most part, will avoid us. However, if a wild animal is hungry, and given a choice between the fast, four-footed horse-like thing, or the soft, squishy, SLOW human, guess which one winds up on the menu...... To me, top of the food chain implies that other animals don't eat you. Depending on circumstances.... that just ain't the case for humans. Just ask the sharks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etang2 Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I like my dog better than most people....... My dog is smarter than a fair few folks I deal with on a daily basis. (I work at staples.......) Dogs don't bite people for no particular reason..... well, ok, there are those that do, but, those would fall in to the 'dangerous' category. Based on what I have seen, dogs bite folks that provoke them. Is that the dogs fault? Heck no. Should the dog be put down for doing so? Not just no....... Unfortunately, where I live, if your dog bites someone, you are automatically at fault, and the dog is ordered put down. Which I find absolutely stupid..... but hey, it's the government, so, it's not like I should be surprised.... Humans are NOT at the top of the food chain. That all depends on circumstances. An unarmed human in the jungle is food for a fair few creatures........ even ARMED humans have become an afternoon snack for various critters......You are confusing the statement. IT was not, are animals equal to Human, its is should other animals be considered equal... parathensis, to humanity. That means the entire species and as a fundemental compartement of the homosaipens, Humanity is at the top of the food chain! What is the only species that has the ability to wipe out every single other species on Earth? The fact that we even have this capability or have the thought mechanisms to enumeriate this capability makes us the food chains top.Also, the food chain, while were on it. The food chain dicates which organism will consume another for sustance, unless you can name another organism/animal that activally hunts and kills Humans with effeciency and in numbers, im afraid you may have to re-state your arguments because they will become null and void.In regards to the dog concept. It is all cirmstantial. It has been previously said that on this thread that all current animals and bio-organisms are created through years of selective breeding and natural selection. Domestic dogs are designed not to be aggressive by nature, inversely to their wild counterparrts, the wolf. The fact that they can be aggressive is merely a hard back to their orgininal nature. When you see a dog bite someone, you are seeing thousands of years of slective breeding unravel. Also, induvidual dogs will vary. So the capability to wipe out entire species in short order (including our own...) puts us at the top of the food chain? Guess what, if you walk into the tigers cage at the zoo, and try and explain that to him, he will yawn, and eat you anyway. Sure, most animals have a healthy fear of man, and for the most part, will avoid us. However, if a wild animal is hungry, and given a choice between the fast, four-footed horse-like thing, or the soft, squishy, SLOW human, guess which one winds up on the menu...... To me, top of the food chain implies that other animals don't eat you. Depending on circumstances.... that just ain't the case for humans. Just ask the sharks.No. Scientifically, top of the food chain implies that the animal above can and will activeally hunt all species beneath in in order to sustain itself. AT no point in history have tigers been known to activelly and prgressive hunt humans for an extended peroid. Furthermore, your tiger point is invalid. Reason? If every human on earth were to engage war with every animal on earth, I can tell you now, all civilians would be decimanted, but ultimately, Humanity is the most powerful and domineering species. And besides, tigers do not choose humans. In middle africa, there are many many tribes that loins could hunt from, tribes of people, but yet they choose fleet antelope, this is because their hunting instincts decree that they hunt other animals, NOT BIPEDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I like my dog better than most people....... My dog is smarter than a fair few folks I deal with on a daily basis. (I work at staples.......) Dogs don't bite people for no particular reason..... well, ok, there are those that do, but, those would fall in to the 'dangerous' category. Based on what I have seen, dogs bite folks that provoke them. Is that the dogs fault? Heck no. Should the dog be put down for doing so? Not just no....... Unfortunately, where I live, if your dog bites someone, you are automatically at fault, and the dog is ordered put down. Which I find absolutely stupid..... but hey, it's the government, so, it's not like I should be surprised.... Humans are NOT at the top of the food chain. That all depends on circumstances. An unarmed human in the jungle is food for a fair few creatures........ even ARMED humans have become an afternoon snack for various critters......You are confusing the statement. IT was not, are animals equal to Human, its is should other animals be considered equal... parathensis, to humanity. That means the entire species and as a fundemental compartement of the homosaipens, Humanity is at the top of the food chain! What is the only species that has the ability to wipe out every single other species on Earth? The fact that we even have this capability or have the thought mechanisms to enumeriate this capability makes us the food chains top.Also, the food chain, while were on it. The food chain dicates which organism will consume another for sustance, unless you can name another organism/animal that activally hunts and kills Humans with effeciency and in numbers, im afraid you may have to re-state your arguments because they will become null and void.In regards to the dog concept. It is all cirmstantial. It has been previously said that on this thread that all current animals and bio-organisms are created through years of selective breeding and natural selection. Domestic dogs are designed not to be aggressive by nature, inversely to their wild counterparrts, the wolf. The fact that they can be aggressive is merely a hard back to their orgininal nature. When you see a dog bite someone, you are seeing thousands of years of slective breeding unravel. Also, induvidual dogs will vary. So the capability to wipe out entire species in short order (including our own...) puts us at the top of the food chain? Guess what, if you walk into the tigers cage at the zoo, and try and explain that to him, he will yawn, and eat you anyway. Sure, most animals have a healthy fear of man, and for the most part, will avoid us. However, if a wild animal is hungry, and given a choice between the fast, four-footed horse-like thing, or the soft, squishy, SLOW human, guess which one winds up on the menu...... To me, top of the food chain implies that other animals don't eat you. Depending on circumstances.... that just ain't the case for humans. Just ask the sharks.No. Scientifically, top of the food chain implies that the animal above can and will activeally hunt all species beneath in in order to sustain itself. AT no point in history have tigers been known to activelly and prgressive hunt humans for an extended peroid. Furthermore, your tiger point is invalid. Reason? If every human on earth were to engage war with every animal on earth, I can tell you now, all civilians would be decimanted, but ultimately, Humanity is the most powerful and domineering species. And besides, tigers do not choose humans. In middle africa, there are many many tribes that loins could hunt from, tribes of people, but yet they choose fleet antelope, this is because their hunting instincts decree that they hunt other animals, NOT BIPEDS Why would they wanna hunt the skinny humans, that would barely feed one of them, when there are plentiful larger animals to eat? It is all circumstantial. Humans only appear to be at the top, as we are the ones with the better weapons. I still like my dog better than most people. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stars2heaven Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I like my dog better than most people....... My dog is smarter than a fair few folks I deal with on a daily basis. (I work at staples.......) Dogs don't bite people for no particular reason..... well, ok, there are those that do, but, those would fall in to the 'dangerous' category. Based on what I have seen, dogs bite folks that provoke them. Is that the dogs fault? Heck no. Should the dog be put down for doing so? Not just no....... Unfortunately, where I live, if your dog bites someone, you are automatically at fault, and the dog is ordered put down. Which I find absolutely stupid..... but hey, it's the government, so, it's not like I should be surprised.... Humans are NOT at the top of the food chain. That all depends on circumstances. An unarmed human in the jungle is food for a fair few creatures........ even ARMED humans have become an afternoon snack for various critters......You are confusing the statement. IT was not, are animals equal to Human, its is should other animals be considered equal... parathensis, to humanity. That means the entire species and as a fundemental compartement of the homosaipens, Humanity is at the top of the food chain! What is the only species that has the ability to wipe out every single other species on Earth? The fact that we even have this capability or have the thought mechanisms to enumeriate this capability makes us the food chains top.Also, the food chain, while were on it. The food chain dicates which organism will consume another for sustance, unless you can name another organism/animal that activally hunts and kills Humans with effeciency and in numbers, im afraid you may have to re-state your arguments because they will become null and void.In regards to the dog concept. It is all cirmstantial. It has been previously said that on this thread that all current animals and bio-organisms are created through years of selective breeding and natural selection. Domestic dogs are designed not to be aggressive by nature, inversely to their wild counterparrts, the wolf. The fact that they can be aggressive is merely a hard back to their orgininal nature. When you see a dog bite someone, you are seeing thousands of years of slective breeding unravel. Also, induvidual dogs will vary. Bacteria, parasites, and other small organisms make food out of human beings every day. There is not a single human that can escape them and they out number us by the trillions. I'd put humans on the top of the food chain in the animal kingdom, but among all living organisms we're gona have to share that spot with a few others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stars2heaven Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 A question for the proponents of equality of species. How far down the evolutionary ladder do you go for equality? Is bacteria an equal life form, if not then you are drawing a line so it's just a matter of degree and perspective as to where you do that. I'd go all the way down. The only place I would draw the line is between two nearly identical organisms. If both have a similar function in the same environment but one is better suited because of some adaptation that the other lacks, I'd say the more suitable one is superior. But I'm making a case for functional superiority, not this moral superiority that I sense this thread is actually about.In that case you better be prepared to starve since even plant life has bacteria. There is credible evidence that a plant 'screams' when picked, hence one could argue that it senses pain. Using Nature as my guideline there are predators and prey and there always have been, we are simply the most pervasive and successful current predator of the planet. I have zero problem with being the apex of the predator chain, if one day we are supplanted then so be it. If any of you want to see themselves morally no better than a cow and can't abide their use as edible livestock then thats your privilege, that just leaves more steak for the rest of us. You misunderstand my post then. I see nothing wrong with eating cattle. Also, I deny that we are the most successful predator. We are merely good at being predators. But we are not even close to the most pervasive and certainly not the most successful. Perhaps among animals, but not among all living organisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etang2 Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 I like my dog better than most people....... My dog is smarter than a fair few folks I deal with on a daily basis. (I work at staples.......) Dogs don't bite people for no particular reason..... well, ok, there are those that do, but, those would fall in to the 'dangerous' category. Based on what I have seen, dogs bite folks that provoke them. Is that the dogs fault? Heck no. Should the dog be put down for doing so? Not just no....... Unfortunately, where I live, if your dog bites someone, you are automatically at fault, and the dog is ordered put down. Which I find absolutely stupid..... but hey, it's the government, so, it's not like I should be surprised.... Humans are NOT at the top of the food chain. That all depends on circumstances. An unarmed human in the jungle is food for a fair few creatures........ even ARMED humans have become an afternoon snack for various critters......You are confusing the statement. IT was not, are animals equal to Human, its is should other animals be considered equal... parathensis, to humanity. That means the entire species and as a fundemental compartement of the homosaipens, Humanity is at the top of the food chain! What is the only species that has the ability to wipe out every single other species on Earth? The fact that we even have this capability or have the thought mechanisms to enumeriate this capability makes us the food chains top.Also, the food chain, while were on it. The food chain dicates which organism will consume another for sustance, unless you can name another organism/animal that activally hunts and kills Humans with effeciency and in numbers, im afraid you may have to re-state your arguments because they will become null and void.In regards to the dog concept. It is all cirmstantial. It has been previously said that on this thread that all current animals and bio-organisms are created through years of selective breeding and natural selection. Domestic dogs are designed not to be aggressive by nature, inversely to their wild counterparrts, the wolf. The fact that they can be aggressive is merely a hard back to their orgininal nature. When you see a dog bite someone, you are seeing thousands of years of slective breeding unravel. Also, induvidual dogs will vary. Bacteria, parasites, and other small organisms make food out of human beings every day. There is not a single human that can escape them and they out number us by the trillions. I'd put humans on the top of the food chain in the animal kingdom, but among all living organisms we're gona have to share that spot with a few others.Remarkably true! XD, its a stale mate, whilst bacteria has killed thousands of million, we have been unable to completely remove them! Stale Mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pseudobio Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Species-ism, Racism, Sexism, and even able-ism, it is all the same to me. What I don't like is "functional discrimination". Just because an individual (of any species, race, or gender) has a funcional limitation does not mean they have a diminished value. To me, a three legged dog has as much value as a four legged dog, specially if that dog lost the one leg by saving its human companion by pushing that human out of the way of an oncoming train and taking the hit for its human companion, which just happened recently. Level of function being used as a definition of value is just as discriminatory as species-ism, racism, or sexism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etang2 Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Species-ism, Racism, Sexism, and even able-ism, it is all the same to me. What I don't like is "functional discrimination". Just because an individual (of any species, race, or gender) has a funcional limitation does not mean they have a diminished value. To me, a three legged dog has as much value as a four legged dog, specially if that dog lost the one leg by saving its human companion by pushing that human out of the way of an oncoming train and taking the hit for its human companion, which just happened recently. Level of function being used as a definition of value is just as discriminatory as species-ism, racism, or sexism.This is an honourable concept but ulimately cannot be applied in the real world. An organism with limited physical ability, regadless of how they aquired this injury, will almost unswayably be of diminished value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 (edited) Species-ism, Racism, Sexism, and even able-ism, it is all the same to me. What I don't like is "functional discrimination". Just because an individual (of any species, race, or gender) has a funcional limitation does not mean they have a diminished value. To me, a three legged dog has as much value as a four legged dog, specially if that dog lost the one leg by saving its human companion by pushing that human out of the way of an oncoming train and taking the hit for its human companion, which just happened recently. Level of function being used as a definition of value is just as discriminatory as species-ism, racism, or sexism.On a personal level I agree with your version of 'able-ism's as it relates to a person or the dog (most dogs are more noble than people). But in terms of an impartial view of species as they relate to survival, it (your thesis) is noble in terms of concept but isn't how nature or natural selection really works. A three legged antelope is not going to out run a cheetah .We both know life is not remotely fair. Edited May 24, 2012 by Aurielius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etang2 Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 @AurieliusExactemement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts