Why bother

Why do we even bother trying to maintain species that should have gone extinct long ago?
Why do people feel this need to protect ‘mother earth’, humankind has had to kick, claw and hunt it’s way to the top and nature has done almost everything it can to screw us over.

I say it’s time that we manned the hell up and realised that nature’s a bitch so she deserves all she gets from us.
We earned our place at the top here so we earned our right to smash whatever the hell we want, they’d do it to us if they had the chance but they don’t.

Mankind needs to start looking out for #1 more, so what if a few chickens die, so what if all the chickens die? we should just focus on getting our butts of this ball of dirt or at least we should begin to understand that we owe it nothing.

Why is there so much hatred in you my friend?

Because you didn’t even try to answer the question

If creatures are not meant to be around then, fine, maybe they move on to other parts of th universe… However is it OK to say that the “black man” should not be around and so what if i few blacks die or if all the blacks die? (that is basically what you are saying, and it is not a good train of thought)

Why would someone want to wrongly harm another? ~ I am not sure ~ stupidity maybe…
Lack of higher way of life perhaps.

I sort of feel that humans will go extinct here if they continue to try to rape and murder other creatures, that is just my feeling on the issue.

I don’t think you understand what I am saying.
Relating what I am talking about (lower order animals etc) to human beings is completely taking it out of context.

As for wrongly harming another, who decides what is right and wrong?

I don’t think humans will go extinct here (barring catastrophic events like nuclear war or something), we are pretty intelligent and pretty ruthless as a species so we’ll be fine.

Hi AdamD

Everyone has different reasons for choosing a vegan life. There are loads of stories on here about why we do what we do. Maybe have a read of some if you’re interested?

I agree with you about there being too much focus on saving the earth. In reality, the earth will be fine. She’s WAY old and has coped with much worse than us humans. What is happening now that people get upset about is that we’re making the earth uninhabitable for humans. You know the script…greenhouse gases, destruction of rainforests, overconsumption of utter junk that ends up in landfill, and all the rest. Environmentalists are trying to keep the earth ok for us and every other species of creature to live on. If we don’t, we’ll all die. Probably not in our life time, but some time not too far away. As a fellow human, maybe this concerns you? For me this is the real issue. We’re trying to save ourselves.

Hope this helps. :smiley:

I would agree that it is senseless to try and save every last species from extinction. 99% of all species eventually die. Probably 100%, but I think we humans want to hope that we, especially, will all live forever or something. OK, possible yes, but a little egocentric, no?

On the other hand, if there’s any reciprocality at all, then they might be worth an effort.

This is exactly why farm animals are still around. For their domestic temperament, their meat, their products, and for their labor. All good for humans. And good for those species, too, if they value their survival.

This is the same reason that dogs and cats are so common. Dogs help humans hunt and herd animals. Cats catch pests.

Wild animals generally are not as useful to humans. They survive on their own. I could see some reasons to help them, though. Studying primates, for example, can give us great insight into our past and, by extension, contemporary human behaviors. It could be discovered that some wild species is helping humans indirectly, by keeping pests down or preventing soil erosion or whatever. Or maybe a wild species, when domesticated, could help us out. Lots of possibilities if you look, I’m sure.

I also heard about some scientists studying schools of fish who then got inspired to develop some kind of computer network-packeting thingy based on their movements.

Native Americans were supposedly inspired by beavers to build fishing nets to catch fish swimming in streams.

It’s about learning from one another!

Hi Sewn

You make some interesting points and it’s great to hear your views. I wondered about a couple of things though. I don’t know anyone who keeps a pet cat or dog because of it’s usefulness in catching pests or hunting. I’m more consistant at catching mice than my cat (which is good 'cos then they get gently put outside and not toyed with then shredded). I think the reason humans want pets and keep them is companionship. Living close to an animal can be good for our mental health in the same way relationships with other humans can. For example, stroking a cat has been found to reduce stress (unless of course you are scared of them or don’t like them). The benefits are essentially social and therefore psychological.

I also believe that red meat is not good for humans to eat and can have a negaive impact on health as well as being difficult to digest. Cows have been bred to be passive. Such a docile creature would struggle to survive in the wild so their temperament has also been drastically effected by their mass production by humans.

Your argument reminded me of an incident at work the other day. My work buddy, being bugged by a wasp, asked if anyone minded if he killed it. I said yes, caught it in a jar and let it out the window. He asked me why I had done that when there is clearly no point in wasps? This discussion about ‘purpose’ made me think we should start with the question 'what’s the point in humans?

What do you think?

Hi again AdamD

Just reread your posts and felt sad to hear you say that being ruthless will keep us ok. I believe the opposite to be true and that compassion makes us all stronger and richer.


Hi Redsunflower,

Thank you for your courtesy. It’s appreciated. Great to hear your views as well.

As for you not knowing any places where cats catch pests, well, I do. I know a farmer who allows cats to roam on his property for that very purpose. It works for him. Is there a better way for him to do it? Maybe. I haven’t asked him at length, but I can guess the reasons why he uses cats.

Would mouse traps be better? Maybe. Probably more time-intensive and costs more money. The mice will just come back, anyway. There is no “outside” for him to loose them into. It’s a farm.

How about improving the safeguards around his house, his silo, and his greenhouses? Again, time and money. And what will happen to the pests then? Without the food on the farm, they will just go elsewhere. Just as likely to starve or risk attack from all manner of wild predators.

I do agree that humane treatment is always best, but there are realistic considerations that should be attended to.

I also agree that cats and dogs can function as companion animals (heck, I do own a companion cat of 10+ years, myself!), but a fellow human being is a better companion in my opinion. I can’t communicate with a cat the way I can with a human. I don’t know the science behind it, but I would be willing to bet that where petting a friendly cat is therapeutic, hugging a human friend is at least as therapeutic, if not more so.

Of course, it’s good to make all the friends we can. Human and non.

I also agree that if there is any reasonable opportunity or inclination to help another animal, then we should do it. I’m a little iffy about wasps (they are dangerous), but as long as it wasn’t aggressive I would either leave it alone or let it out.

As for the purpose in humans, well, is our purpose very different from other animals? Primarily, animals eat, poop, and breed. Mammals, especially, will also socialize, nurse, and care for one another. Over time, animals evolve. Everything evolves. Everything lives, dies, and evolves.

Sorry I missed this one.

Personally, I think red meat is very healthy for you. High in heart-healthy saturated fat. It is only difficult to digest when it is overcooked, such as a well-done steak or hamburger. It is best raw or lightly cooked. EDIT: NOT ALWAYS SAFE WITH FACTORY MEAT. INDUSTRIAL HANDLING CARRIES A MUCH HIGHER LIKELIHOOD OF PATHOGENS. I’m talking in idealistic terms. Red meat that lived a healthy life.

Think about it. Native American used to eat plenty of roaming bison. Ever seen a picture of a fat Native American? Not one on a reservation, mind you. Do you think eating bison gave Native Americans heart problems? Does that mesh with the fact that they spent much of their time being extremely active, especially in demanding pursuits such as hunting?

The Inuit today eat loads of seal and whale meat. Could the Inuit survive in the harshest climates on this Earth if their hearts weren’t working properly?

Did you know that there are no recorded instances of long-standing vegetarian societies on the planet? The vast majority of humans eat some meat. Unless they lived by a river or an ocean, they probably included red meat from game animals. Along this reasoning, I believe that red meat is very healthy for you. It is unhealthy meat that is unhealthy to eat.

As for breeding physical passivity in cows, yes, that’s what happened. What about it? Is it necessarily bad? No, they wouldn’t survive in the wild. That’s why humans (hopefully) keep them safe from predators until the slaughter.

Here’s another example (got this from a blog, which is all that I can attest to its truth):

Horses were bred into domestication because they had good tempermants. They were genetically predisposed to be ridden.

Zebras? No chance. Too skittish. Didn’t want any part of it. They stayed wild and so they stayed in Africa. Horses went on to see most of the world. As species, we make choices. Sometimes outside our control.


Sewn I really think you don’t belong on this website, please do yourself and everyone a favor and GTFO with your friend AdamD.

How can you say all those words?? Why do you hated so much those animals? Did they do anything bad to you? I think you’re not a human being…you’re a CONDENSED MASS OF HATRED… :cyclopsani:

Sewn and Redsun, you both make very interesting and obviously well thought out points.

However it seems to me that in some ways you are both agreeing with me, whether we keep animals (cats and dogs to follow with your example) around for practical purposes, like catching mice or guarding the house, or just for friendship we are still essentially only doing it because it serves us one way or another.

After reading what you both said though I have come to a new understanding about the relationship between people and animals, especially domesticated animals. Although sometimes the relationship can be exploitative like the killing of animals for meat the process is not completely malicious. By this I mean that the species as a whole can usually prosper in it’s relationship with mankind.

What Sewn said earlier about learning from our environment rang particularly true to me, we as a species can only grow stronger in an environment including other species.

It was a pleasure reading what both had to say, bravo!

As for the two fools who posted above me.
Trev: Who are you to decide who is welcome here, your negative attitude is disgusting.
aaroniero: Well done, you really are a huge hypocrite. You scold me for hating and then go on to insult and dehumanise me. Wow.

George Monbiot addresses this in his article The Natural Aesthete…

I think it’s an interesting thing! It certainly depends on if you are a religious or not. If not, then Monbiot argues, who cares? Why does it matter? The universe certainly does not care as in however many years, the sun will explode and that will be the end of it for all of us, no matter how many species we have conserved.

He strives to create an argument beyond a utilitarian one as to why we should conserve species, and preserve the environment.

In the end I think the point he makes is interesting: we care. It matters because we care, and we shouldn’t really be afraid of using that as a argument. It may not be scientifically based but it is generally agreed that the world would be a poorer place without them. We perceive suffering, and thus try to lessen the suffering of others.

Really neat article, you should give it a read. :slight_smile: It really does sort of support both sides of the argument, or at least makes one consider both sides.


Responding purely to your synthesis of his argument of: It matters because we care. Logically that means that it doesn’t matter because I don’t care (not me as in myself just as in anyone). Unsubstantial claims can be dismissed insubstantially.

Of course there are some humans who don’t care. Just as there are some humans who don’t care about fighting AIDS, or preventing WAR, or coming up with new treatments for DISEASES, or creating more opportunities for childhood EDUCATION.

Should we just tell all of those people then that it’s pointless, since not everyone cares?

Exactly my point circular, the argument he presented is flawed.

Just because someone cares or doesn’t care doesn’t define the importance of a particular subject.

Hey Adam,

I think that when all the people would learn everything they have to learn, the world will stop existing and the BIG peace will come. And then we can surf the cosmos as happy everlasting souls.

In order to obtain that we must first create the paradise on earth. It would not happen unless all the beings are treated respectfully. Then we would not even need to worry about “why bother”, we might like our paradise and live and go from this planet whenever we wish.

I mean this is partly philosophical note but it does has a true seed in it.