Saddest thing

This is a nice story, and I applaud the OP for making that decision to spend his money on the kitten. My first reaction would be have been put the thing out of its misery (I grew up on an acreage/hobby farm - I've had to do it since I was a young boy).

Originally Posted by Rosenberg

Click to expand...

the mountain lions were there first. i'm sure i'll get called a dick for saying that but it's true

I'm also going to get torn apart for this, but frankly, I do put more value on the life of a mountain lion cub than a human child. Call me a fool if you want, and I certainly hope the children were well taken care of, but I do feel strongly about this.

I guess it's about utility for me, when it comes down to needing to make a one or the other decision.

Originally Posted by unjung

Click to expand...

I'm also going to get torn apart for this, but frankly, I do put more value on the life of a mountain lion cub than a human child. Call me a fool if you want, and I certainly hope the children were well taken care of, but I do feel strongly about this. I guess it's about utility for me, when it comes down to needing to make a one or the other decision.
+1. We're no better than mountain lions, we should respect them. Humans are just another animal anyways.

Originally Posted by Connemara

Click to expand...

+1. We're no better than mountain lions, we should respect them. Humans are just another animal anyways.
An animal that has the potential to do far more good than any motherless ******* mountain lion cub. Of course humans are worth more than mountain lions. This is not to say that we should just kill everything with no remorse, but it's ludicrous to say that all organisms are inherently equal. They're clearly not. Holy ****, I'm a little disgusted that anyone is suggesting that a mountain lion cub is worth more than a human child. Jesus, do you guys listen to yourself? Even if you say it's about "utility", how in the **** is it more utilitarian to favor the life of a mountain lion cub over the life of a human child? That makes no sense.

I am a pan-speciesist. Whatever that means.

Originally Posted by tor

Click to expand...

An animal that has the potential to do far more good than any motherless ******* mountain lion cub. Of course humans are worth more than mountain lions. This is not to say that we should just kill everything with no remorse, but it's ludicrous to say that all organisms are inherently equal. They're clearly not. Holy ****, I'm a little disgusted that anyone is suggesting that a mountain lion cub is worth more than a human child. Jesus, do you guys listen to yourself?

Even if you say it's about "utility", how in the **** is it more utilitarian to favor the life of a mountain lion cub over the life of a human child? That makes no sense.

Are you serious? All humans have done is destroy the planet and breed war and disease. Humans have done nothing good for this Earth. In fact, they've done nothing good for themselves either, in the sense that as a species we are at a greater risk of complete self-destruction than we were 500 years ago.

I'm not even a hippie. I don't recycle and I don't turn off my lights. I eat meat. My point is, the idea that humans do anything "good" compared to other animals is ludicrous. The only good thing about saving a human life compared to an animal's is that it is one of us and we have a drive to protect the species, and to value other things like us. That's it. And you know what, that's a good enough reason for me to save a human child over an animal, but at least I'm calling a spade a spade. At least I understand that the human kid I'm saving is more likely than not to contribute to the misery of this planet.

Originally Posted by MetroStyles

Click to expand...

Are you serious? All humans have done is destroy the planet and breed war and disease. Humans have done nothing good for this Earth. In fact, they've done nothing good for themselves either, in the sense that as a species we are at a greater risk of complete self-destruction than we were 500 years ago.

I'm not even a hippie. I don't recycle and I don't turn off my lights. I eat meat. My point is, the idea that humans do anything "good" compared to other animals is ludicrous. The only good thing about saving a human life compared to an animal's is that it is one of us and we have a drive to protect the species, and to value other things like us. That's it. And you know what, that's a good enough reason for me to save a human child over an animal, but at least I'm calling a spade a spade. At least I understand that the human kid I'm saving is more likely than not to contribute to the misery of this planet.

That's why I said potential. Clearly humans have more potential, both for evil and for good. The uncertainty of our actions and their ultimate consequences is the sole reason why humans are so special. Our ability to act morally and evaluate our actions on a level completely removed from our physical state is what separates us from the other animals on this planet. I agree with you that humans are almost entirely destructive, and the majority of people are ****** human beings. But just as humans have an almost endless capacity for evil, our existence as nearly infinite beings goes both ways, no ****.

I apologize for derailing this thread and I look forward to updates on the cat. I am a huge animal lover. Humans are easily replaceable. I personally can do my part to create one every 30 minutes or so, I imagine up to around 10 times per day under duress. I cannot create mountain lions. If a human is any more utile than a mountain lion in the natural order, it is because it can deliberately and consciously control its reproductive success. It may be argued that it is less valuable than a mountain lion, because there are less mountain lions than humans. Otherwise it is no more and no less valuable than a mountain lion or a gnat.

Originally Posted by tor

Click to expand...

That's why I said potential. Clearly humans have more potential, both for evil and for good. The uncertainty of our actions and their ultimate consequences is the sole reason why humans are so special. Our ability to act morally and evaluate our actions on a level completely removed from our physical state is what separates us from the other animals on this planet. I agree with you that humans are almost entirely destructive, and the majority of people are ****** human beings. But just as humans have an almost endless capacity for evil, our existence as nearly infinite beings goes both ways, no ****.
The ability of a flea to jump the equivalent of 60 football fields is what differentiates it from other animals. The ability of a Goliath beetle to carry 60 times its own weight differentiates it from other animals. The ability of an emperor penguin to walk a hundred miles across the ice having not eaten in months is differentiates it from other animals. The ability of a sea anemone to potentially have no natural lifespan (they may well live forever!) is what differentiates it from other animals. Humans will be dead in a couple centuries at worst, a couple dozen millenia at best. Flatworms will probably remain completely unchanged. We value what's important to us - intelligence and related attributes. Frogs value eating insects, calling for mates and staying wet. Nature values one thing - survival, procreation, the passing-on of genetic material.

Originally Posted by unjung

Click to expand...

I apologize for derailing this thread and I look forward to updates on the cat. I am a huge animal lover.

Humans are easily replaceable. I personally can do my part to create one every 30 minutes or so, I imagine up to around 10 times per day under duress. I cannot create mountain lions. If a human is any more utile than a mountain lion in the natural order, it is because it can deliberately and consciously control its reproductive success. It may be argued that it is less valuable than a mountain lion, because there are less mountain lions than humans. Otherwise it is no more and no less valuable than a mountain lion or a gnat.

It would seem that Darwinism suggests that the less numerous a species is, the less fit to survive it is. Also, any value you attach based on naturalistic processes is artificial, although I see where you're coming from. Agree to disagree?

Originally Posted by shoreman1782

Click to expand...

YOU SAVED KITLER

Ha ha yeah he does have the little black spot and the picture is kinda iconic-ish i suppose.

Originally Posted by JonHecht

Click to expand...

My point exactly. Be ******* consistent, people. You should all be bloody vegans, if you really feel this way. I am, but it doesn't mean that I am going to cry every time go to the store and see a turkey sandwich.

Me be consistent??? I just wanted to save this kitten sorry if it bothered you.

Originally Posted by Rosenberg

Click to expand...

the mountain lions were there first. i'm sure i'll get called a dick for saying that but it's true

I think that is the sentiment shared by many people. You see it all the time. People seem to be more freely giving to animals than to their fellow humans. I guess when people see animals they see innocence and somehow that is lost looking at other humans. I would say I am guilty of this sometimes, too.

Originally Posted by tor

Click to expand...

It would seem that Darwinism suggests that the less numerous a species is, the less fit to survive it is. Also, any value you attach based on naturalistic processes is artificial, although I see where you're coming from. Agree to disagree?

I do agree. And the question of whether the impact of humans on other animals is a natural process or unnatural process is one that I do not think can be answered. If the early North Americans caused the extinction of the giant sloth, is that any more acceptable as the Dutch wiping out the dodo? I don't know.

I think value is always imposed, subjective and unnatural.

Deep conversations... guys

Originally Posted by unjung

Click to expand...

I do agree. And the question of whether the impact of humans on other animals is a natural process or unnatural process is one that I do not think can be answered. If the early North Americans caused the extinction of the giant sloth, is that any more acceptable as the Dutch wiping out the dodo? I don't know. I think value is always imposed, subjective and unnatural.
Yeah, that's a good point. I think the idea that anthropogenic extinction is somehow different than other previous extinctions really just goes to show how the idea that humans are somehow more than just animals is very deeply ingrained in the general consciousness. Sorry Korben, I'm not trying to hijack Rudy's thread.

Wow, you are quite an optimist, and I'm glad that the kitten lived. I would definitely have assumed it wouldn't make it and killed it on the spot to prevent it from suffering any longer than it had to. That vet must be pretty damned good at his job...

Originally Posted by Korben

Click to expand...

Deep conversations... guys

Originally Posted by tor

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a good point. I think the idea that anthropogenic extinction is somehow different than other previous extinctions really just goes to show how the idea that humans are somehow more than just animals is very deeply ingrained in the general consciousness.

Sorry Korben, I'm not trying to hijack Rudy's thread.

No worries. Its fine

Originally Posted by JD_May

Click to expand...

Wow, you are quite an optimist, and I'm glad that the kitten lived. I would definitely have assumed it wouldn't make it and killed it on the spot to prevent it from suffering any longer than it had to. That vet must be pretty damned good at his job...

She is... apparently.

Originally Posted by unjung

Click to expand...

very nice.