Equality of Species in Negav

Nothing if it's part of their culture/life.

ZionAtriedes wrote:

Well, Krisexy, though I am a pro-human (and, by extension, a supporter of our fellow victims such as the nekos and inu), I must also acknowledge that most predators are uneducated and know no better. They do not know that humans are every bit as intelligent as they are, or that they are sapient people. Those that do, however, shall receive no sympathy from me!

THAT! That is exactly my view of predators and the reason why I hate people that blindly bash them. They know nothing about humans. For them, they're just like any other prey that they catch. Heck, some predators even eat smaller variants of their kind. Fiona demonstrate it best since she was raised by humans. She knows that they're much more than just walking gummies, but at the same time, she knows that the big fish must eat the small one to survive. I even have a fairy who now live with humans and it's only now that she's realising that she knew nothing about humans. I say she's only beginning because she's wondering why didn't the humans she eat use technology to be more difficult to catch, because she's not aware that there are infinite human cultures with differing means of survival and different circumstances one would be in Felarya.

Grave wrote:

Nothing if it's part of their culture/life.

Right and wrong transcend culture.

Yes, Sean, but some predators are perfectly aware that their prey is thinking and feeling.

ZionAtriedes wrote:

Grave wrote:

Nothing if it's part of their culture/life.

Right and wrong transcend culture.

Yes, Sean, but some predators are perfectly aware that their prey is thinking and feeling.

Right and wrong have no meaning outside of culture. They certainly do not transcend it.

Grave wrote:

ZionAtriedes wrote:

Grave wrote:

Nothing if it's part of their culture/life.

Right and wrong transcend culture.

Yes, Sean, but some predators are perfectly aware that their prey is thinking and feeling.

Right and wrong have no meaning outside of culture. They certainly do not transcend it.

I disagree. Anything that infringes upon the inherent rights of others is wrong.

Also, take into account the sadism of most predators. See this wiki article.

My stance on the whole "Preds = Monsters?" thing:

Is Crisis a monster to the people she eats? Hells yeah- she toys with them, gives them false hope that they might get away, then swallows them alive and enjoys the feeling of them thrashing around in her belly. Looking at her from that perspective, she and all predators like her are absolute monsters.

But is Crisis a monster in the grand scheme of things? Not at all- she's a predator, and she, not knowing any better, sees humans as prey. Not only prey, but generally smaller and tastier prey as well. Macabre as we might see it, really, why shouldn't she eat humans if the opportunity presents itself? Even if she doesn't have to eat people, she still has to eat, and she'll eat whatever can, whenever she can. Again, because she's a predator in the wild, and that's what predators in the wild do.

So you can view predators as monsters if you like and I definitely won't disagree with you, but really it's just nature taking its course.

SO!
Back to the original issue of species equality in Negev. I've always wondered, how might a stranger human-sized race like Icthys be perceived there? And since there's a giant dimensional gate right next to the city, who else here imagines like a Star Wars cantina scene with like a Protoss at the jukebox and some Warcraft Orcs getting hammered at the bar or something?

ZionAtriedes wrote:

Grave wrote:

ZionAtriedes wrote:

Grave wrote:

Nothing if it's part of their culture/life.

Right and wrong transcend culture.

Yes, Sean, but some predators are perfectly aware that their prey is thinking and feeling.

Right and wrong have no meaning outside of culture. They certainly do not transcend it.

I disagree. Anything that infringes upon the inherent rights of others is wrong.

Also, take into account the sadism of most predators. See this wiki article.

some predators may use that plant for the fun of it, but they dont know any better, they grew up that way.

ZionAtriedes wrote:

I disagree. Anything that infringes upon the inherent rights of others is wrong.

Though I risk sending this thread way off topic, I have to say that concept of an "inherent right" transcending cultures and being universal has some serious problems. Specifically and in my opinion, for something to be an "inherent right" it must be something that cannot possibly be taken away by any other being or force. I do not know of any right that cannot be taken away, either by force, chemical adjustment, or social engineering. I suppose if you count physical laws as rights, then those things can't be taken away, but I also don't really see the point of saying "You have the inherent right to have a mass energy equivalent of e=mc^2".

That said, there likely are a set of rules (or several different sets of rules) that will confer an advantage to most, if not all, social groups that follow them. For example, if a society follows the rule "You cannot be deprived of your life without due process", said society is much more likely to thrive since the resources that its members previously spent defending their lives are now freed up for other purposes. But this is not an inherent right, nor is it a rule that all social groups would benefit from following; it is not terribly difficult to construct a species/social-group that is actually better off if it doesn't follow this rule.

As for how this relates to Felaryan predators being monsters:
-Under most human morals, the predators are monsters.
-Under a purely strength based morality/survival of the fittest, they are not.
-Under a "trial by combat" morality, they are not.
-Under a "humans are just food" ignorance type of morality, they are not.
-Under a "it's wrong to kill intelligent beings, but I just can't quit humans because they are so tasty", they are monsters.
-Under a "Everything has a right to live" type of morality, they are monsters... as are humans, any carnivores, any omnivores, any herbivores, and in fact so is anything that actively or inactively causes harm/potential harm to another living thing, which may include every single living organism that has ever existed or will exist.

How does this relates to Negav and species equality?
Thankfully, the Eye doesn't need to determine morality. It merely needs to figure out which creatures like to eat people/humanoids, and chase them off, a much simpler task. (Which in and of itself is defining a morality, specifically the morality that "eating people is bad, and chasing those who do so away/causing them pain is not bad/good/okay.")

Hmmm, this thread has veered in an interesting direction, albeit an often-discussed one.

Obviously, the predators who see humans as nothing but walking gummy-bears, ignorant of their actual intelligence, aren't really to blame. It's their upbringing, and the resultant horrible deaths are tragic/hilarious, but hardly the work of sadistic cruelty.

Now, the interesting part, for me anyway, is the question of how we, as humans, define who/what is acceptable to kill because you like how it tastes. It's OK to eat pigs, but not other humans, right? That seems reasonable, but how do we come to that conclusion? Pigs are less intelligent, and generally speaking lower forms of life, as we understand it. Plus they're super tasty.

That's all well and good, but let's make things trickier; some species of parrots are supposedly has smart as a 3/4 -year-old baby. Nobody thinks it's okay to eat 3-year-olds (I hope), but if people were frying up those parrots for lunch, I doubt there would be nearly the outrage (if any) that you would get for eating babies. Why? Parrots aren't people. The parameters by which we attribute worth to beings are not nearly as objective as we'd like to think, I think.

And for the record, I eat pigs all the time. (bacon strips!)

prinny i loled at your comment

we humans do not eat what has a better form of intelligence. we do not eat daulphin (though some chinese people yes! grrrrrrr), dogs or elephant

PrinnyDood wrote:

Hmmm, this thread has veered in an interesting direction, albeit an often-discussed one.

This thread has gotten quite off topic. Yes, this discussion emerged from the previous, but a new thread has made so the original topic of this thread can continue to be discussed.
Please continue the current discussion in this thread.