To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 6233
6232  |  6234
Subject: 
Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?")
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:07:25 GMT
Viewed: 
2379 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:

I would say that the deer were not 'put' on earth, they were born just like
us. And thus, there is no 'purpose' as such.

  Perhaps not some preordained purpose, but they do fill a role as prey, just
as humans fill a role as (for instance, with thanks to George Carlin) the
manufacturers of plastic.

Like humans, they have the ability to make whatever purpose they want for
their life.

  Do you actually believe this? We're talking about deer, right?  A deer does
not make its own purpose, beyond what is programmed into it or, to a more
limited degree, what it learns.  What can it "choose" to do, other than to
make a few very minor alterations to its behaviors?  Can it choose not to be
an herbivore?  Can it choose a life of abstinence?  Can it choose not to be
prey?  I don't understand how you feel deer can "make whatever purpose they
want" or even how you would define what a deer "wants".

Mostly all they'll do is try to live as long as possible and procreate.  That
purpose -- being good enough for them -- is good enough for me.

  Deer do not "want" either of these things; they do them out of hard-wirded
genetic programming. For that matter, it's not "good enough for them" nor bad
enough--it simply *is,* and they live and/or die as a result.  The notion of
choice, in anything other than an avoidance or embrace of stimuli, seems to me
little more than anthropomorphizing animals with a type of programming
fundamentally (and inescapably) different from that of humans.

Chris (Who doesn't want to be predator or prey -- and believes that can
happen.)

  Perhaps, but not on this Earth.  You're prey to infection by harmful
bacteria that attack you not because they want to but because they are what
they are.  In addition, given the chance, most large predators would think
nothing of making a meal of you, not because they want to but because they are
predators.

     Dave!



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?")
 
(...) I didn't know that George Carlin was crucial to the plastics industry. ;-) Absolutely. They are prey to wolves, people, etc. -- and they prey on vegitation (preferring my juvenile apple trees to all else, so it would seem). (...) I believe (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?")
 
(...) Hi again, I think that this will forever be our stumbling block. I presume that you base these theories on a holy text of some kind rather than observable phenomina? (Except, of course, the bit about the relationship between prey and predator (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

149 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR