The arrogance of humans

[rwyatt365]

Ok, this has been something that comes up from time to time when I'm watching TV, or reading a book. Have you ever thought about how arrogant humans are? I'm not talking about your typical run-of-the-mill arrogant ass, the kind you run into at work, or driving down the highway, or in the checkout lane. No, I mean the arrogance that assumes that "we" are the center of everything; the only being with intelligence (both off-world and on), the only creature with a soul, the highest expression of evolution. Pick your area, "we" are always the best or the first.

I find this really annoying because I think that "reality" is so much bigger than we can ever imagine. Human beings don't know as much as we think we know. I hate it when a so-called expert says, "The [fill in the blank] only does this behavior out of instinct. There is no conscious thought involved". And I say, "HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?!". Unless there is a means of reading another creature's mind, that statement is only a presumption based on conjecture and not a fact. It doesn't matter if the discussion is about pigs, or petunias, or pygmies – the fact is that kind of thought is pure arrogance.

I think of this tendency as mostly a Western thing (because I'm a product of that society) – I wonder if that is strictly so. Any other thoughts?

[Rei]

No, I mean the arrogance that assumes that "we" are the center of everything; the only being with intelligence (both off-world and on), the only creature with a soul, the highest expression of evolution. Pick your area, "we" are always the best or the first.
...
I think of this tendency as mostly a Western thing (because I'm a product of that society) – I wonder if that is strictly so. Any other thoughts?

I think that every time people bring up humility in Christianity. (I'm sorry that I'm going to have to bring religion into this)
One time I was called arrogant for not believing in/submitting to a God. It made me so angry because the person was Christian, and technically Christians thing humans are the superior being among things on this Earth; which I definitely do not think is true. Unfortunately he was my boss, or else I would have given him a really, REALLY long "piss off!" speech.

Just using religion - as religion has always been the center of a society's culture - yes this is a Western tendency. Most religions in Asia, Africa etc tend to 'respect the balance' and put Humans in a 'web of life' where animals are gifts, and we must honour (even worship) them; rather than as a 'hierarchy of power' (eg, God is the king, Humans are his Lords, and animals are the peasants who serve, free or enslaved)

[biased]

No, I mean the arrogance that assumes that "we" are the center of everything; the only being with intelligence (both off-world and on), the only creature with a soul, the highest expression of evolution. Pick your area, "we" are always the best or the first.
...
I think of this tendency as mostly a Western thing (because I'm a product of that society) – I wonder if that is strictly so. Any other thoughts?

I think that every time people bring up humility in Christianity. (I'm sorry that I'm going to have to bring religion into this)
One time I was called arrogant for not believing in/submitting to a God. It made me so angry because the person was Christian, and technically Christians thing humans are the superior being among things on this Earth; which I definitely do not think is true. Unfortunately he was my boss, or else I would have given him a really, REALLY long "piss off!" speech.

Just using religion - as religion has always been the center of a society's culture - yes this is a Western tendency. Most religions in Asia, Africa etc tend to 'respect the balance' and put Humans in a 'web of life' where animals are gifts, and we must honour (even worship) them; rather than as a 'hierarchy of power' (eg, God is the king, Humans are his Lords, and animals are the peasants who serve, free or enslaved)

How do you know they are Christian and not just saying they are?

[Max T]

How do you know they are Christian and not just saying they are?

biased- could be two interpretations?
1. "not just saying they are"- i.e. the boss was pretending that they were Christian for the sole purpose of saying that Rei is arrogant on that point, or

2. "not just saying they are"- because, unlike the boss, a true Christian would not have called Rei arrogant for not believing in God?

[rwyatt365]

Religion is an obvious starting point for arrogant behavior; man vs animal, religion vs religion, etc… Some of this has been touched on in other threads. I'm thinking more of the human state of mind that feels that any other creature is inferior to us. Or the complacency that allows us to cut down a rainforest without blinking an eye.

We can point to technology and say, "Isn't that superior to anything else?" But are our steel skyscrapers better technology than the "technology" of a termite's mound? And, can we truly say that what those termites do is ONLY a result of instinctual drives? Can you prove that? When I watch the nature shows on TV and hear the announcers say, "The lion's mating is driven by the instinct to procreate", I wonder – I there a lion version of Barry White playing that we just don't recognize? I may sound foolish, but how do we KNOW that lions don't just like to get laid?!

My contention is, that we don't and shouldn't presume otherwise.

[Rei]

How do you know they are Christian and not just saying they are?

biased- could be two interpretations?
1. "not just saying they are"- i.e. the boss was pretending that they were Christian for the sole purpose of saying that Rei is arrogant on that point, or

2. "not just saying they are"- because, unlike the boss, a true Christian would not have called Rei arrogant for not believing in God?


Yeah... I still don't understand what biased is asking...
But the answer is... he's very Christian... I also think he's a jerk...

[Rei]

Religion is an obvious starting point for arrogant behavior; man vs animal, religion vs religion, etc… Some of this has been touched on in other threads. I'm thinking more of the human state of mind that feels that any other creature is inferior to us. Or the complacency that allows us to cut down a rainforest without blinking an eye.

We can point to technology and say, "Isn't that superior to anything else?" But are our steel skyscrapers better technology than the "technology" of a termite's mound? And, can we truly say that what those termites do is ONLY a result of instinctual drives? Can you prove that? When I watch the nature shows on TV and hear the announcers say, "The lion's mating is driven by the instinct to procreate", I wonder – I there a lion version of Barry White playing that we just don't recognize? I may sound foolish, but how do we KNOW that lions don't just like to get laid?!

My contention is, that we don't and shouldn't presume otherwise.


Who says a humans having sexual intercourse isn't just an instinctual drive to procreate? I mean... essentially, that's what it is. Hormonal signals that tell you to 'do it' every chance you get.

Humans are no better than animals. At least animals don't usually get greedy and take more than they need. >:(

[Jbmontag]

My definition of arrogance. Hello from my town, it's also home to Focus On The Family

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Ted Haggard interview with Richard Dawkins"

[wise]

Ok, this has been something that comes up from time to time when I'm watching TV, or reading a book. Have you ever thought about how arrogant humans are? I'm not talking about your typical run-of-the-mill arrogant ass, the kind you run into at work, or driving down the highway, or in the checkout lane. No, I mean the arrogance that assumes that "we" are the center of everything; the only being with intelligence (both off-world and on), the only creature with a soul, the highest expression of evolution. Pick your area, "we" are always the best or the first.

I find this really annoying because I think that "reality" is so much bigger than we can ever imagine. Human beings don't know as much as we think we know. I hate it when a so-called expert says, "The [fill in the blank] only does this behavior out of instinct. There is no conscious thought involved". And I say, "HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?!". Unless there is a means of reading another creature's mind, that statement is only a presumption based on conjecture and not a fact. It doesn't matter if the discussion is about pigs, or petunias, or pygmies – the fact is that kind of thought is pure arrogance.

I think of this tendency as mostly a Western thing (because I'm a product of that society) – I wonder if that is strictly so. Any other thoughts?

I wonder, how many of you equal to animals ever eat meat or animal products?

[Rei]

I wonder, how many of you equal to animals ever eat meat or animal products?

Why do you think eating an animal makes you better than the animal? I didn't mean we're equal in the sense that we're the same... we're equal in the sense that we shouldn't put our existence above theirs. "We eat animals," it makes it sound like we have all the power doesn't it? How about "We depend on animals for food?" They are just as important a creature as we are. "You are what you eat." Without animals, or even plants as sustenance, we cannot survive. (well unless you want to eat humans.. but then that'd degrade humans wouldn't it?)

Also, that is why some cultures don't eat meat/animal products. My Hindu friend boycotted milk when I told him about the production process :thinking:
It's the Westerners who're meat obsessed. Look at the "Meat = Wealth" concept from way back in Western history...

[biased]

How do you know they are Christian and not just saying they are?

biased- could be two interpretations?
1. "not just saying they are"- i.e. the boss was pretending that they were Christian for the sole purpose of saying that Rei is arrogant on that point, or

2. "not just saying they are"- because, unlike the boss, a true Christian would not have called Rei arrogant for not believing in God?


Number 2.

There are many who call themselves under the label of a "Christian" but they are not truly a Christian as they do not follow in the ideology of putting others before yourself and treating them with respect.

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
Matthew 7:1

[wise]

I wonder, how many of you equal to animals ever eat meat or animal products?

Why do you think eating an animal makes you better than the animal? I didn't mean we're equal in the sense that we're the same... we're equal in the sense that we shouldn't put our existence above theirs. "We eat animals," it makes it sound like we have all the power doesn't it? How about "We depend on animals for food?" They are just as important a creature as we are. "You are what you eat." Without animals, or even plants as sustenance, we cannot survive. (well unless you want to eat humans.. but then that'd degrade humans wouldn't it?)

Also, that is why some cultures don't eat meat/animal products. My Hindu friend boycotted milk when I told him about the production process :thinking:
It's the Westerners who're meat obsessed. Look at the "Meat = Wealth" concept from way back in Western history...

I disagree. I don't see animals as equal to me. If I did, I wouldn't eat meat.

It's okay if you believe animals are as important as people. I just see a fallacy in that argument if animals are consumed by those they are equal in importance to.

[Rei]

I disagree. I don't see animals as equal to me. If I did, I wouldn't eat meat.

It's okay if you believe animals are as important as people. I just see a fallacy in that argument if animals are consumed by those they are equal in importance to.


Well it's obvious you don't see animals as equal to you. I got that in your first post.

But it's also obvious you didn't get the point of my post.
Different things are important for different reasons. Animals (all living creatures) are just as important as humans in that we wouldn't be alive without them. Which means without them we die, in other words we cease to exist. And if we don't exist, we cannot be "better".

So we are "better"... if and only if we rely on things 'lesser' than us (other living things). But it's okay if you don't see the paradox in that. I guess this will have to be another one of those religious vs non-religious things that can never be settled.


Number 2.

There are many who call themselves under the label of a "Christian" but they are not truly a Christian as they do not follow in the ideology of putting others before yourself and treating them with respect.

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
Matthew 7:1
Yeah I guess he just likes to believe he's a good Christian. Fact is, not many Christians know all there is to know about their religion. It's actually very depressing :-/

But anyway... Being an intJ: I judge because I expect to be judged. :thumbsup:
No offense to St. Matthew. (Saint right :-? ) Yikes, sorry that my knowledge of the bible is pitiful.

[wise]

I guess this will have to be another one of those ......things that can never be settled.


I respectfully agree. I don't see it as religious issue, hence the ellipses.

I do understand the interdependence plane of equality, so to speak. I concede that on that aspect you are correct. I still believe that human beings are more important than animals. Like you said, this is one of those "things that can never be settled."

Agreeing to disagree is a good thing. ;)

[Rei]

I do understand the interdependence plane of equality, so to speak. I concede that on that aspect you are correct. I still believe that human beings are more important than animals. Like you said, this is one of those "things that can never be settled."

Agreeing to disagree is a good thing. *;)

Seeing that persepective is all I ask :thumbsup:

[rwyatt365]

I wonder, how many of you equal to animals ever eat meat or animal products?

Why do you think eating an animal makes you better than the animal? *I didn't mean we're equal in the sense that we're the same... we're equal in the sense that we shouldn't put our existence above theirs. *"We eat animals," it makes it sound like we have all the power doesn't it? *How about "We depend on animals for food?" *They are just as important a creature as we are. *"You are what you eat." *Without animals, or even plants as sustenance, we cannot survive. *(well unless you want to eat humans.. but then that'd degrade humans wouldn't it?)

Also, that is why some cultures don't eat meat/animal products. *My Hindu friend boycotted milk when I told him about the production process :thinking:
It's the Westerners who're meat obsessed. *Look at the "Meat = Wealth" concept from way back in Western history...

I disagree. I don't see animals as equal to me. If I did, I wouldn't eat meat.

It's okay if you believe animals are as important as people. I just see a fallacy in that argument if animals are consumed by those they are equal in importance to.

I wouldn't rank humans, or any other creature, as being more important than any other. Each one is different and has it's own niche in the whole matrix of life. Animals consume plants and other animals, plants consume animals and other plants. That is a fact of life - nothing lives without destroying something else. So I have no qualms about eating a salad or a steak. I just don't feel that the cow, or the spinach plant is "beneath me" because I consumed it.

In fact, if I were stripped of my technology and placed out on the African veldt, I would consider myself fair game for any lion, hyena or wild dog that encountered me. In that scenario, none is better than the other, just different.

[wise]

I wonder, how many of you equal to animals ever eat meat or animal products?

Why do you think eating an animal makes you better than the animal? I didn't mean we're equal in the sense that we're the same... we're equal in the sense that we shouldn't put our existence above theirs. "We eat animals," it makes it sound like we have all the power doesn't it? How about "We depend on animals for food?" They are just as important a creature as we are. "You are what you eat." Without animals, or even plants as sustenance, we cannot survive. (well unless you want to eat humans.. but then that'd degrade humans wouldn't it?)

Also, that is why some cultures don't eat meat/animal products. My Hindu friend boycotted milk when I told him about the production process :thinking:
It's the Westerners who're meat obsessed. Look at the "Meat = Wealth" concept from way back in Western history...

I disagree. I don't see animals as equal to me. If I did, I wouldn't eat meat.

It's okay if you believe animals are as important as people. I just see a fallacy in that argument if animals are consumed by those they are equal in importance to.

I wouldn't rank humans, or any other creature, as being more important than any other. Each one is different and has it's own niche in the whole matrix of life. Animals consume plants and other animals, plants consume animals and other plants. That is a fact of life - nothing lives without destroying something else. So I have no qualms about eating a salad or a steak. I just don't feel that the cow, or the spinach plant is "beneath me" because I consumed it.

In fact, if I were stripped of my technology and placed out on the African veldt, I would consider myself fair game for any lion, hyena or wild dog that encountered me. In that scenario, none is better than the other, just different.

The difference I see is that humans aren't consumed, on a regular basis, by any other creature. Yes, a wild animal would consider your fair game, but you aren't their natural prey. Humans are not the natural prey of any species of animal. That's where the difference lies for me. However, I respect your freedom to believe as you choose. ;)

[jeffersonian]

Maybe I missed the point of the original thread, but I didn't think it was necessarily about animals or eating meat. It was more about sapien-centric filth that human pigs roll in all day.

Examples:

1. Jane Goodall puts out a special, "Chimps, so like us." The obvious implication is that this makes them more special and worthy of our attention. If it includes our penchant for genocide and cruel indifference, maybe I don't want to like chimps.

2. I wrote a collection of poems for a high school project that praised the beauty that will come when humans are extinct and nature can reassert itself without our damaging behavior. Mind you, I did not dwell on the cause or process of extinction; I merely described the stillness and beauty of an earth in balance. I was asked to see the counselor to determine whether I was depressed simply because I happen to think my species is an invasive pest.

3. Spaying/neutering pets is viewed as humane because after domesticating animals, we have determined that we're too irresponsible to care for them. As a result, we decide to mutilate the reproductive organs of others. Rank this right up there with declawing your cat. If you don't want a cat that sprays, scratches, and reproduces, I got news for you: you don't really want a cat because that's what cats do. Animals aren't here for customization.

4. Even this web of life interpretation of other religions that view animals as gifts is still suggesting that their value is based on our need for them.

5. Objections to human cloning are just based on the misguided notion there's something special about it. Split some cells, grow a human, shocking revelation: you're not as special as you think you are. This is all viewed as "playing God" because we're so awesome that it MUST have taken a god to make us, right? Sheesh.

As to whether animals are superior to humans, I would have to say it's false. That's just a transparent attempt to feel special and bring meaning to our sordid existence.

And it doesn't matter what I eat (vegetarian-in-training, actually) because regardless of my ability to live up to them, I still have principles.

[TeleportThis]

Those of you saying humans aren't better than anything else; if having to choose between the life of a human and the life of any other animal, which are you most likely to choose? I'm willing to bet that you are going to choose the human. I understand believing all animals serve a purpose and what not, but I find it hard to believe that you think the life of a human is worth the same as any other creature's.

It does annoy me when people think that animals only act on instinct without any reasoning for their actions. If you've ever owned a pet, you know that's not true.

Human's are the most unique creature on earth. We manipulate our surroundings to suit our needs far better than any other animal, and we are the only animal to have created a written language. Written language allows us to pass knowledge to the next generations, allowing them to build off of it. Without this we probably wouldn't be as advanced as we are today, and this is what sets us apart from the other animals, for better or worse.

[rwyatt365]

Maybe I missed the point of the original thread, but I didn't think it was necessarily about animals or eating meat. It was more about sapien-centric filth that human pigs roll in all day.
Thank you Jeffersonian, that is indeed my original intent (I wouldn't be as "extreme" in my expression though)

1. Jane Goodall puts out a special, "Chimps, so like us." The obvious implication is that this makes them more special and worthy of our attention. If it includes our penchant for genocide and cruel indifference, maybe I don't want to like chimps.
…yes, as if chimps (or poodles, or goldfish) have gained our stamp of approval, and therefore are worthy of existence. WE don't get to make that distinction.

2. I wrote a collection of poems for a high school project that praised the beauty that will come when humans are extinct and nature can reassert itself without our damaging behavior. Mind you, I did not dwell on the cause or process of extinction; I merely described the stillness and beauty of an earth in balance. *I was asked to see the counselor to determine whether I was depressed simply because I happen to think my species is an invasive pest.
"Be like us, or we'll institutionalize you", a common reaction.

3. Spaying/neutering pets is viewed as humane because after domesticating animals, we have determined that we're too irresponsible to care for them. As a result, we decide to mutilate the reproductive organs of others. Rank this right up there with declawing your cat. If you don't want a cat that sprays, scratches, and reproduces, I got news for you: you don't really want a cat because that's what cats do. Animals aren't here for customization.
…but we do it all the time. How many plants and animals are here because of human intervention? Does that make us better? I would say that it make us very clever but, again, not necessarily better.

4. Even this web of life interpretation of other religions that view animals as gifts is still suggesting that their value is based on our need for them.
The "web of life" is a valid analogy, but to relegate other species as our gifts ("…and ye shall have dominion over all…") to me is going too far. It presumes that humans are above and independent of that web – we are NOT.

5. Objections to human cloning are just based on the misguided notion there's something special about it. Split some cells, grow a human, shocking revelation: you're not as special as you think you are. This is all viewed as "playing God" because we're so awesome that it MUST have taken a god to make us, right? Sheesh.
Any rational examination of humanity can only come to the conclusion that we are a PART of everything and not ABOVE it. Our blood has the salinity level of seawater, we share 9x% of our genetic makeup with those "oh, so precious" chimps. There is nothing of ourselves that makes us "special". We are "unique" though, just as any other species in and of itself is unique.

As to whether animals are superior to humans, I would have to say it's false. That's just a transparent attempt to feel special and bring meaning to our sordid existence.
And just as humans are not necessarily superior, neither are any other creature superior. Each species has abilities, traits and talents that make it specifically suited to one, or perhaps several tasks. But just because we have created computers and airplanes doesn’t exempt us from the march of time. Someday, some other creature will come along and our exhibit will be right next to the dinosaur's in their museum.

[Rei]

3. Spaying/neutering pets is viewed as humane because after domesticating animals, we have determined that we're too irresponsible to care for them. As a result, we decide to mutilate the reproductive organs of others. Rank this right up there with declawing your cat. If you don't want a cat that sprays, scratches, and reproduces, I got news for you: you don't really want a cat because that's what cats do. Animals aren't here for customization.

This one bugged me.
First of all, we do not spay/neuter our pets because we're too irresponsible to care for them. Essentially the point is animals shouldn't have been domesticated. But having done so, it is the best choice to spay/neuter them for their sanity's sake or for the sake of possible offspring.


Those of you saying humans aren't better than anything else; if having to choose between the life of a human and the life of any other animal, which are you most likely to choose? I'm willing to bet that you are going to choose the human....

Human's are the most unique creature on earth. We manipulate our surroundings to suit our needs far better than any other animal, and we are the only animal to have created a written language. Written language allows us to pass knowledge to the next generations, allowing them to build off of it. Without this we probably wouldn't be as advanced as we are today, and this is what sets us apart from the other animals, for better or worse.
Actually I wouldn't mind if I became an animal. Frankly, if I did get magically turned into an animal, I'd just do what I'm supposed to do as an animal. I'd be just as discontent with the world as I am now.

Humans are unique. You can't say humans are better because we are unique. A serial murderer is unique, but is he better than everyone else? I don't think so.
Yes, we are brilliant, we invent things. But I still don't see how intelligence equates to being better. It just so happens that the state of the world at this moment favours our abilities. If there happened to be a sudden major disaster (say an astroid hit the Earth, messing up climate patterns and air composition etc), certain types of bacteria would probably survive while the human species is wiped out. Those bacteria in the 'new era', may then possibly evolve into something as 'intelligent' as current humans.

I simply don't think intelligence and uniqueness equates to us being better.

[rwyatt365]

Humans are unique. *You can't say humans are better because we are unique. *A serial murderer is unique, but is he better than everyone else? *I don't think so.
Yes, we are brilliant, we invent things. *But I still don't see how intelligence equates to being better. *It just so happens that the state of the world at this moment favours our abilities. *If there happened to be a sudden major disaster (say an astroid hit the Earth, messing up climate patterns and air composition etc), certain types of bacteria would probably survive while the human species is wiped out. *Those bacteria in the 'new era', may then possibly evolve into something as 'intelligent' as current humans.

I simply don't think intelligence and uniqueness equates to us being better.
Exactly...

Humans are good at what humans do, and in that we are unique. Chickens are good at what chickens do, and in that they are unique. Unique = different than everything else, it does not mean better than everything else. To assume superiority is arrogance.

We are "intelligent" based on the measure that we have defined intelligence to be. If we took a lion's IQ test would we score so high? Would we know the fundamentals of disembowling (sp?) a wildebeast? On that scale, would a knowledge of particle physics mean anything?

[TeleportThis]

Those of you saying humans aren't better than anything else; if having to choose between the life of a human and the life of any other animal, which are you most likely to choose?

I'm glad both of you ignored this question...



And to clarify, I wasn't saying we were better because we are unique, but because we are unique, I do find us to be the most interesting creatures.

And as far as becoming an animal...I'm really not sure where that came from, but I've always wanted to be a cat.

[rwyatt365]

Those of you saying humans aren't better than anything else; if having to choose between the life of a human and the life of any other animal, which are you most likely to choose?

I'm glad both of you ignored this question...



And to clarify, I wasn't saying we were better because we are unique, but because we are unique, I do find us to be the most interesting creatures.

And as far as becoming an animal...I'm really not sure where that came from, but I've always wanted to be a cat.

...why?

On the one hand I thought it somewhat peripheral to what I was trying to say. But, to answer the question, I guess it would depend on the situation.

If I were in the Artic and I had to choose between "Joe" and a sled dog I would have to bid Joe a fond farewell. In that case, the dog is nore useful to me than the human. I would not feel that a human was fundamentally or intrinsicly more valuable then another animal - the circumstances would dictate my choice.

That may sound cruel - and my wife poses similar questions to me and I give similar answers, to her horror - but I feel that it's just practical and logical. Let's say we're running from...zombies ;D and you trip and fall. Well, unless you're the one with the weapons, you might just find yourself the meal du jour. (Sorry kid, gotta go)

[Entropy]

I encounter this sort of arrogance a lot when debating with people over religion. I observe it in both atheists and Christians. Usually with the sort of atheists who assume that through science humans can answer pretty much all questions about the universe, and that we can observe objective truth. And with the sort of Christians who look at the universe and think all of this was created for us, with us in mind, by a God who watches over us closely and loves us. HAH, to both.
I don't think humans are completely "worthless", but in comparison to the immensity of the universe, we look pretty damn insignificant. And once our race is gone we will have been but a breath in the span of time, an itch on the back of Earth. Nature can wipe us clean from the slate, and not give the slightest damn about it.

[Rei]

And to clarify, I wasn't saying we were better because we are unique, but because we are unique, I do find us to be the most interesting creatures.

And as far as becoming an animal...I'm really not sure where that came from, but I've always wanted to be a cat.


I didn't ignore it... I said I'd be fine with whatever it was. I think choice is a luxury... so I will cope with whatever is thrown at me. I wouldn't mind being a sea gull... even if it means eating garbage all the time.

Also... a human finds that humans are the most interesting animal. Can I say self absorbed?
There are so many other species out there, have you studied all of them enough to know that they are not all just as interesting in their own right? You think humans are the most interesting because you can grasp the ideas that go through human heads, and these intrigue you.
You don't know the secrets of all these other animals... you can't say rightfully they're uninteresting unless you've been inside their heads, seen what goes on in there, and still think they're dull.

I encounter this sort of arrogance a lot when debating with people over religion. I observe it in both atheists and Christians. Usually with the sort of atheists who assume that through science humans can answer pretty much all questions about the universe, and that we can observe objective truth. And with the sort of Christians who look at the universe and think all of this was created for us, with us in mind, by a God who watches over us closely and loves us. HAH, to both.
I don't think humans are completely "worthless", but in comparison to the immensity of the universe, we look pretty damn insignificant. And once our race is gone we will have been but a breath in the span of time, an itch on the back of Earth. Nature can wipe us clean from the slate, and not give the slightest damn about it.
Well that's depressing.
However, it is also very true... and so I am as humble as I can be to my fellow "itch[es] on the back of the Earth"... except for humans, because it seems that most cannot grasp that they are merely itches, and will simply get confused.

[bikerscars]

I didn't ignore it... I said I'd be fine with whatever it was. *I think choice is a luxury... so I will cope with whatever is thrown at me. *I wouldn't mind being a sea gull...
You don't know the secrets of all these other animals... you can't say rightfully they're uninteresting unless you've been inside their heads, seen what goes on in there, and still think they're dull.


anyone else read that and think of the book 'jonathon livingston seagull'

i believe most life is precious ('cept mosquitoes, ticks, fleas and other parasites as well as household pests such as cockroaches and flies) and should be treated as such; now i do eat meat but have struggled with the ethics involved

[Entropy]

I don't think humans are completely "worthless", but in comparison to the immensity of the universe, we look pretty damn insignificant. And once our race is gone we will have been but a breath in the span of time, an itch on the back of Earth. Nature can wipe us clean from the slate, and not give the slightest damn about it.
Well that's depressing.
However, it is also very true... and so I am as humble as I can be to my fellow "itch[es] on the back of the Earth"... except for humans, because it seems that most cannot grasp that they are merely itches, and will simply get confused. Yes, both confused and upset. I think people find it comforting to think that we do have some greater significance in this immense universe. But I don't find it depressing even if we don't. We are still manifestations of a greater, more magnificent whole. And though we are small, we never seem to cease to amaze ourselves with what we actually can accomplish.

[TeleportThis]

Also... a human finds that humans are the most interesting animal. Can I say self absorbed?
There are so many other species out there, have you studied all of them enough to know that they are not all just as interesting in their own right? You think humans are the most interesting because you can grasp the ideas that go through human heads, and these intrigue you.
You don't know the secrets of all these other animals... you can't say rightfully they're uninteresting unless you've been inside their heads, seen what goes on in there, and still think they're dull.


I suppose you could call me self absorbed, but having that attitude shows that you think you are better than me because I don't share the same views as you. How's that for arrogant? "Oh, look at me, I think animals are just as cool as people and because you don't, I'm better than you!" is pretty much the message I am getting from your posts.

It is impossible for anyone to get inside the head of an animal, so we have to judge whether they are interesting or not based on what we can. I did research on turtles for two years, and found it utterly boring. That's the closest I've come to getting inside the head of an animal.

But anyway, I'm done arguing with you. I don't think its arrogant for humans to find themselves more interesting than other animals, but actually rather natural. You think it is. Fine.

[Rei]

I suppose you could call me self absorbed, but having that attitude shows that you think you are better than me because I don't share the same views as you. How's that for arrogant? "Oh, look at me, I think animals are just as cool as people and because you don't, I'm better than you!" is pretty much the message I am getting from your posts.

That was not my intention. I'm sorry that you feel that way, and I'm sorry that you took it so personally.

It is impossible for anyone to get inside the head of an animal, so we have to judge whether they are interesting or not based on what we can. I did research on turtles for two years, and found it utterly boring. That's the closest I've come to getting inside the head of an animal.

Well I must say, animals must think we're "utterly boring" as well.

Can I say self absorbed?
I'm sorry that I came across as being forceful about this; that was distasteful and I shouldn't have said it. I just wanted to try to show another way of seeing it, my mistake for thinking you wanted to. As wise said, I'll just "agree to disagree."

[jeffersonian]

This one bugged me. First of all, we do not spay/neuter our pets because we're too irresponsible to care for them. Essentially the point is animals shouldn't have been domesticated. But having done so, it is the best choice to spay/neuter them for their sanity's sake or for the sake of possible offspring.


By that logic, do you support the sterilization of humans if you are worried about whether they'll be able to take care of their children? Mind you, you have to be okay with forcing this on a person. You can't get consent.

It's really no different. I think it's awfully self-indulgent to think we can make the judgment for them about whether they should have offspring or not. Further, it would be one thing to make this decision and simply keep them apart, but we perform involuntary surgery. That's nothing short of vile.

I don't think people spay and neuter because they think animals should not have been domesticated in the first place. If that's the case, why aren't we advocating for the extermination of these animals? That's the only realistic way to end the dependency if we find that so wrong. Nobody wants to do that, including me, but what we've decided is that instead of caring for these animals and giving them good homes where we support their natural inclination toward reproducing, we cut out their reproductive organs.

You really don't see our failure to take responsibility in this?

[Rei]

By that logic, do you support the sterilization of humans if you are worried about whether they'll be able to take care of their children? Mind you, you have to be okay with forcing this on a person. You can't get consent.

It's really no different. I think it's awfully self-indulgent to think we can make the judgment for them about whether they should have offspring or not. Further, it would be one thing to make this decision and simply keep them apart, but we perform involuntary surgery. That's nothing short of vile.

I don't think people spay and neuter because they think animals should not have been domesticated in the first place. If that's the case, why aren't we advocating for the extermination of these animals? That's the only realistic way to end the dependency if we find that so wrong. Nobody wants to do that, including me, but what we've decided is that instead of caring for these animals and giving them good homes where we support their natural inclination toward reproducing, we cut out their reproductive organs.

You really don't see our failure to take responsibility in this?
1. We don't keep humans as pets.
But yes I see your point. I just think it is even more irresponsible if you take animals as pets, let them go around and mate, and then not take care of the offspring. I guess you can file it into a human limitation; we domesticate them, but we fail to be able to take care of their offspring.

Side note: If I were to decide never to have children, I'd probably want to get me reproductive organs removed. Frankly I was much more comfortable when I wasn't aware of their existence.

[Sergeant]

I like the overall question. It reminds me of the ideal of the Native American philosophy. Which brings up a point I have been struggling with lately. White men took over North America, claiming 'Manifest Destiny,' how arrogant was that!

[rwyatt365]

I like the overall question. *It reminds me of the ideal of the Native American philosophy. *Which brings up a point I have been struggling with lately. *White men took over North America, claiming 'Manifest Destiny,' how arrogant was that!
...and Spaniards South America, and the Moors the Iberian peninsula, and the Christians the "Holy Land", and the Japanese China, and the English Australia, and...

Man has done this since the beginning of (so-called) civilization.

[thegnat]

I agree with you rwyatt365.

Humans do seem quite arrogant.

But I suppose another question to ask is "what gives us conscious thought?" Do other animals have that capacity? Perhaps they do. The brain is an organ that there is a lot unknown about. So why not can't that be unknown about animals? Maybe they do have conscious thought, too and we just don't know it yet. I think it's very probable.

Humans do seem to have the tendency even with their own species to have arrogance over others.....As your examples indicate...

Is it unrealistic to think other animals do that?

Is it fear of inferiority to other animals that we think we're superior to all else?

I think I'm rambling :\ I'm stopping...

[youngblooded]

I believe that arrogance will eventually kill a person. For example, an arrogant person would typically overlook areas that are of importance which eventually turns into weakenesses.

[muguly]

We(humans)are a strange. Because we can only communicate with each other we assume we have the only cognitive thought process. It takes a great leap of faith to believe that something that has only been in exisitance a few thousand years is superior.If the animals that were here before us didn't feel the need to "improve" the world around them, how completely unneccessary was...is it for us to do so. Every "improvement" in "civilized" life causes a negative effect on the natural state of things. Life has become too complex. We have lost touch of things that are important. It is amazing that we are now fixing problems,pollution, global warming, over population, etc, that we have caused all in the name of improvement. The world is rapidly falling apart while we worry about the economy and getting the latest, greatest whatever. Eventually, Earth will become inhopsitable to us, then only the animals will be left and they will think:wow, they(humans)didn't last long. Oh well, atleast the water and air are clean again.

[Antares]

Ok, this has been something that comes up from time to time when I'm watching TV, or reading a book. Have you ever thought about how arrogant humans are? I'm not talking about your typical run-of-the-mill arrogant ass, the kind you run into at work, or driving down the highway, or in the checkout lane. No, I mean the arrogance that assumes that "we" are the center of everything; the only being with intelligence (both off-world and on), the only creature with a soul, the highest expression of evolution. Pick your area, "we" are always the best or the first.

I find this really annoying because I think that "reality" is so much bigger than we can ever imagine. Human beings don't know as much as we think we know. I hate it when a so-called expert says, "The [fill in the blank] only does this behavior out of instinct. There is no conscious thought involved". And I say, "HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?!". Unless there is a means of reading another creature's mind, that statement is only a presumption based on conjecture and not a fact. It doesn't matter if the discussion is about pigs, or petunias, or pygmies – the fact is that kind of thought is pure arrogance.

I think of this tendency as mostly a Western thing (because I'm a product of that society) – I wonder if that is strictly so. Any other thoughts?

Eh. It really ticks me off. It does. Whats with all those people thinking they're in the center of the universe? In history, it's always 'us' and 'them'. We are the cilivilized people. They are the barbarians (or heathens). We deserve to live. They deserve to die. Heck. They aren't even people. Why do WE have souls? We are arrogant enough to think that we are made in God's image (while no one can confirm that), knowing fully well that we are not in any place of significance, that we have our many limitations and are in reality, not as smart as we'd like to believe. Ok. I'm mainly just repeating what you've said, so I'm going to stop here.

[vaguely dissatisfied]

Uh......this is a great philisophical question!! I love it!! I have thought about this forever. I start off by thinking about us as a species on the planet. I'm not trying to make us better, or equal, or less than any other species by doing this, but just trying to think about it from a third party perspective. Then I think about how most other species behave. Generally (and I'm no authority on this), I believe that most species avoid using each other as food sources, but do fight over mating, food etc. and most species are not averse to harming and exploiting other species for their own gain (mostly food but other stuff as well). This is probably an adaptive evolutionary function that has proven successful and has, therefore, been selected for.

Homo Sapiens appear to be no exception. In other words, we appear to be hard-wired to avoid using each other as food, clothing, and 'what have you' sources and are more prone to satisfying these needs through other species. We still fight with each other over 'inside issues' and these issues are more complicted than other species seem to deal with, however, when you break it down, there seems to be a similar pattern?

My point is that it may be more of a genetically programmed condition than one of arrogance?

[buoin]

I tend to see us all one in the same. I can’t see why any human would believe themselves to be superior to anything else. I could see possible traits that deem us more capable. But then I could also see traits that make us very weak when compared to other animals. You ever see when we (humans) get angry? We don’t look as wild… our teeth are round, our fingernails not as strong as claws. If we look at what nature created you can see what a wolverine looks like when it is angry, see what a grizzly bear looks like when it’s angry, and on and on.

The same could be said for animals trying to best us at human traits that we are normally good at. Although I think one could say that when it comes traits in general animals and humans go hand in hand. What of the dog that rescues its owner from a burning building? What of the human that rescues the life of millions by finding a vaccine for an incurable disease? There are some birds that require the use of other animals so they may continue on their procreation.

Insects help fertilize the ground and the plants help produce edible ones so some animals can survive from it, those animals are killed by other animals, and humans either take the plants or animals for nourishment.

There is so much diversity everywhere you go on our planet. Humans just happen to express it in a way that either seems very beneficial to one another or very cruel. I could say that ants are superior to humans because of their ability to fully function in an almost teamwork like manner. Can we even build like they do without having to make slaves of people? I don’t think we could and even if we advanced to that level of unity someone would come along and say it was just instinct or a manner in which humans naturally take a liking to. I’d like to believe maybe that would be the case one day but it shows that we’d rather wage war, conquer one another, and bring down this planet to its knees.

Just because I can go out and slaughter an animal for food, kill a bunch of bugs, and drive in an automobile doesn’t make me superior. It is only what seems to be a functional superiority not something in the bigger picture of things. Give it time and that slaughter of animals will produce a disease, give it time that automobile will produce gases that harm our planet, and in eventually that human will die (death, life and birth happen to all things). Being superior is working within the ecosystem of our planet and fully embracing it without harming anything but contributing to it. That to me is superior because in the long run we get to keep it all balanced and improve upon our human species, animals’ species, and everything else that is here.

[Antares]

I believe that being so 'smart' has made us arrogant and weaker in some other aspects. After all, life is all about give and take. I'd wager that our ancestors would be able to beat us in survival techniques and gathering food any day.

[Vaden Koch]

I think that every time people bring up humility in Christianity. (I'm sorry that I'm going to have to bring religion into this)
One time I was called arrogant for not believing in/submitting to a God. It made me so angry because the person was Christian, and technically Christians thing humans are the superior being among things on this Earth; which I definitely do not think is true. Unfortunately he was my boss, or else I would have given him a really, REALLY long "piss off!" speech.

Just using religion - as religion has always been the center of a society's culture - yes this is a Western tendency. Most religions in Asia, Africa etc tend to 'respect the balance' and put Humans in a 'web of life' where animals are gifts, and we must honour (even worship) them; rather than as a 'hierarchy of power' (eg, God is the king, Humans are his Lords, and animals are the peasants who serve, free or enslaved)

Growing up I always thought Christianity was such a sham. People talking one way and then acting in a way that was completely contradictory to their proposed beliefs. But as I got older, and in search of other religious beliefs, I found that many other religions did this very same thing. Today, I am a devout Christian because of circumstances and experiences that I won’t mention here. And belonging to a Christian community, I can say many so-called Christians are extremely arrogant. But I call them for what they are, basically a bunch of fakes who are on a power-trip. People wanting power in any area but are unable to obtain it due to their lack of effort, intelligence or for whatever other reason, often tend to gravitate towards religion. Well, that’s my opinion anyhow. Many "preachers" for instance, only start a church for either money or power, or both. They like attention and love the sound of their own voice. It’s pretty sad, but it certainly does happen.

[Antares]

I believe that arrogance will eventually kill a person. For example, an arrogant person would typically overlook areas that are of importance which eventually turns into weakenesses.

This reminds me of Achilles :D Although his was generally ignorance because he did not know of the weakness in his heel. But yes, he was arrogant, going into battle against the prophesy conveyed by his mother believing that he is absolutely invincible and nothing could ever destroy him.