Should predation in the natural world be stopped?

Post Reply New Topic

Really it's just a very bad idea. Even our smallest efforts to change the course of nature can have a horrific backfiring effect. Have we really not yet come to the understanding that the natural cycles on our planet are tremendously delicate and it is best if we try to tread lightly. I did some work with chaos theory back in college and have come to respect all of the natural cycles on earth and how they are all interrelated. If you ask me, we've already got ourselves into quite a pickle.

The counter-argument you two are giving doesn't seem to work, as the OP states: "Basically, this philosopher thinks that we should eliminate all suffering, even in the natural world"

Plants do not have nervous systems, therefore plants do not suffer. Thus, eating plants is not a problem.

the only way to be a non predatory vegetarian is to eat fruits and go to the toilet in the fields far from the plant that bore the fruit,

plants give "fruits" to animals to eat, and then the animals defecate the seeds far and wide so the plants can proliferate, and it is very symbiotic.

if there are truly no predators, then all parasites and diseases would not exist.
by "disease" i mean a pathogen that uses your energy to multiply.

if there are no diseases then pandemonium is inevitable.

I think it's anthropomorphication run amuck...

Do you know how many millions of predatory species there are? And how many millions of ecosubsystems depend on predation?

Someone needs to spend less time memorizing all the verses 'Kum by Yah', and more time studying basic biology....

What the hell do you know about how plants feel? A nervous system is not he only way living things react to stimuli.

Were doing our best to kill off all the marine life which is hugely predatory but it's a big job.

A nervous system is essentially necessary for the feeling that people have called pain or any other feeling associated with suffering. So, living things without nervous systems can be assumed to feel no pain and not to suffer at all. Creatures with nervous systems though, and ones that have reactions in a manner similar to our own reactions to hurtful stimulus could easily be considered to suffer though.

If this guy/gal's considered a philospher (I haven't read the fine article at all, by the way), he or she's certainly not a biologist!

But that's assuming that there's only one way to feel pain/indications of damage/danger.

The damage is more significant than merely just the sensation of pain.