Hunting

[ultraviolet]

Re: Hunting.

I think hunting is okay if you're hunting for food, you're culling, or if you're hunting for sport and using something like a bow & arrow, as long as it's nothing endangered. Otherwise, no.

Shooting a deer with a laser-guided gun with telescopic vision isn't hunting. It's a videogame.

 

[Ruby]

Re: Hunting.

if you're hunting for sport and using something like a bow & arrow

Why is that okay?

 

[J.T.]

Re: Hunting.

... what the hell difference does it make what you're using to kill the animal? You're killing it for a quick testosterone (sp?) boost and nothing more. Whether you're using a gun, a bow, a car, or whatever else, you're killing for fun.

 

[nyuu]

Re: Hunting.

The entire species doesn't help every living thing, but humans have the mental capacity to help other things.

and yet they clearly don't. being the only ones capable of helping and then choosing not to makes us so superior

 

[Espeon]

Re: Hunting.

... what the hell difference does it make what you're using to kill the animal? You're killing it for a quick testosterone (sp?) boost and nothing more. Whether you're using a gun, a bow, a car, or whatever else, you're killing for fun.

I agree. Killing for fun- In fact, just killing in general is wrong. Except in the case of stem cell research and putting animals down for the greater good. I'm fine with that. But anyway, I find it absolutely terrible how people can go out, kill something, and still look at themself in the mirror that evening! I can't even look at myself after shouting at someone. I couldn't imagine myself harming an animal.

 

[Altmer]

Re: Hunting.

and yet they clearly don't. being the only ones capable of helping and then choosing not to makes us so superior

It's the fact that we can make this choice that makes people claim we are morally superior. But it's a moot point since humans are just another species to roam the earth and eventually their evolutionary perspective will win out in that regard. People will only be moralistic when it suits them to be so. Friendship and alliances are essentially a matter of strategy.

 

[Ruby]

Re: Hunting.

And I think there is evidence that several species help other animals.

 

[Altmer]

Re: Hunting.

I'm not saying "don't help other people." But evolutionarily speaking altruism is always coming from some form of symbiosis where it benefits both parties to be altruistic. Even the fact that people and animals do help each other doesn't mean they're not selfish. Evolutionarily speaking, pure altruism serves no purpose. The only reason people cooperate is because it helps them survive the day.

 

[camerupt]

Re: Hunting.

and yet they clearly don't. being the only ones capable of helping and then choosing not to makes us so superior

No, it doesn't. Choosing to makes people superior. We haven't yet, but I bet we will within 50 years.

 

[Altmer]

Re: Hunting.

No, it doesn't. Choosing to makes people superior. We haven't yet, but I bet we will within 50 years.

What makes you think a mere 50 years is going to elicit a change in human behaviour when the past couple thousand haven't done anything to change it?

 

[camerupt]

Re: Hunting.

What makes you think a mere 50 years is going to elicit a change in human behaviour when the past couple thousand haven't done anything to change it?

Why do you assume they haven't? People get most of their meat from farms, where the animals were bred and not killed in the wild. More wild animals are being killed by pollution/global warming, and people are working on alternative energy sources to cut back on that.

 

[Altmer]

Re: Hunting.

Why do you assume they haven't? People get most of their meat from farms, where the animals were bred and not killed in the wild. More wild animals are being killed by pollution/global warming, and people are working on alternative energy sources to cut back on that.

Don't you see that everything they do is still, in and of itself, an effort to serve themselves? Do you not notice that whether these animals live or die is of no concern to the people who work on alternative energy sources? Do you not realise that the only thing fuelling these concerns is an impending oil crisis? Oil prices have risen so much over the past years it's not even funny. People need alternative and cheap energy sources fast because within 20 years, if oil prices continue to rise at this rate, it won't be affordable anymore. I doubt all the big factories are doing it out of concern for a few endangered species of animals.

Humanity isn't inherently altruistic or good. They are self-serving, like every other fucking species on this planet is. The only reason they socialise is because if war spread everywhere, everyone's lives are in danger. That is how it is. If it were profitable to run wars, world leaders would run them. Hence why Iraq is getting ruined. Hence why Afghanistan is getting ruined.

This is also why people hunt. People want food, and they want to survive. Hence, they're gonna get food for themselves. The only reason people don't hunt much anymore is because with the advent of farming technology, hunting became a time-consuming and impractical source of nutrition, which people could compensate for with domesticated animals. Nowadays we have supermarkets and bio-industry, which eliminate our need for hunting as a source of food altogether, except in a few barren desolate areas maybe. There is no need for hunting, except perhaps as a leisure activity, and as a leisure activity killing is a despicable act anyway. I don't see what there is to fucking argue here.

 

[camerupt]

Re: Hunting.

Don't you see that everything they do is still, in and of itself, an effort to serve themselves? Do you not notice that whether these animals live or die is of no concern to the people who work on alternative energy sources? Do you not realise that the only thing fuelling these concerns is an impending oil crisis? Oil prices have risen so much over the past years it's not even funny. People need alternative and cheap energy sources fast because within 20 years, if oil prices continue to rise at this rate, it won't be affordable anymore. I doubt all the big factories are doing it out of concern for a few endangered species of animals.

Humanity isn't inherently altruistic or good. They are self-serving, like every other fucking species on this planet is. The only reason they socialise is because if war spread everywhere, everyone's lives are in danger. That is how it is. If it were profitable to run wars, world leaders would run them. Hence why Iraq is getting ruined. Hence why Afghanistan is getting ruined.

This is also why people hunt. People want food, and they want to survive. Hence, they're gonna get food for themselves. The only reason people don't hunt much anymore is because with the advent of farming technology, hunting became a time-consuming and impractical source of nutrition, which people could compensate for with domesticated animals. Nowadays we have supermarkets and bio-industry, which eliminate our need for hunting as a source of food altogether, except in a few barren desolate areas maybe. There is no need for hunting, except perhaps as a leisure activity, and as a leisure activity killing is a despicable act anyway. I don't see what there is to fucking argue here.

No, humanity is not inherently good, but it has the ability to be good. I'm going to stop arguing because no matter what, we are not going to agree. This is just a waste of time.

 

[Dannichu]

Re: Hunting.

I'm not saying "don't help other people." But evolutionarily speaking altruism is always coming from some form of symbiosis where it benefits both parties to be altruistic. Even the fact that people and animals do help each other doesn't mean they're not selfish. Evolutionarily speaking, pure altruism serves no purpose. The only reason people cooperate is because it helps them survive the day.

Why do people do things like give blood? It weakens them and helps complete strangers they;ll probably never meet and are probably unrelated to.

You guys have a far too cynical view of humanity. People aren't just products of evolution and genes.

 

[Ruby]

Re: Hunting.

I disagree with both camerupt and Altmer.

 

[Icalasari]

Re: Hunting.

What makes you think a mere 50 years is going to elicit a change in human behaviour when the past couple thousand haven't done anything to change it?

The fact that people panic more easily now about things like Global Warming? :D?

And I think there is evidence that several species help other animals.

Yeah, it is called Mutualism. As in, a symbiotic relationship that benefits BOTH species. Yep, comes down to greed

But yeah, it is getting off topic, so... *Goes to fork the thread* :D

EDIT: ...There is no Fork Button anymore... WOW, am I EVER attentive >.>

 

[Ruby]

Re: Hunting.

I think humans are capable of altruism and I think it is rather arrogant to say that animals are not.

 

[Icalasari]

Re: Hunting.

Ok, I started a thread so we can continue to talk about altruism, people and animals being capable of it, etc. so that we can get back to the topic on hand :D

I still do not like Hunting for sport. Like I said before, they should use every part they can. But overpopulation IS a problem... Even so, though, can't uses be found for every part?

 

[Altmer]

Re: Hunting.

And when they do they know they themselves will receive some reward in return, or it's not in their interest to do it.

 

[Altmer]

Re: Hunting.

The entire species doesn't help every living thing, but humans have the mental capacity to help other things.

Err, symbiosis occurs amongst more animals than just mere humans. Wolves hunt in packs. Many herbivores travel in groups. Elephants are very social animals that help each other. Helping animals of the same species, hell, even other species, occurs in nature just like it does amongst humans.

You ever heard of a lichen? That, my friends, is already two organisms in symbiosis helping each other to survive.

What you're looking for is that humans are rationally capable of forming moral systems and implementing these. Unfortunately, in general humans act just like animals would. There still is a very primitive nature about human actions. It isn't reflected in direct cannibalism or in hunting any more, because right now, that is simply inexpedient for most humans. Humans have become dependent on one another to survive: that is the only reason most humans are social, and I'm pretty sure that if humans could survive solitarily (though they can, it's not always advantageous to do this), they would.

The only reason we use morals is because it benefits us to use them. That sounds silly and Machiavellian, but that's how it is. Ends justify the means.