4 ms·

What point are you trying to make? Let invasive species flourish uncontrolled? Cull the human population?

• cygx 7y ago
  The latter, presumably: Culling humanity for its own good is generally considered immoral, while it is deemed acceptable in case of nonhuman animals. That mismatch requires justification.
  • sithadmin 7y ago
    >That mismatch requires justification. Only when looking through the lens of fringe ideologies. The overwhelming majority of humans don't subscribe to moral ideologies that ascribe equivalent moral standing to humans and nonhuman animals.
    • cygx 7y ago
      It also took quite a while for people to come up with the concept of universal human rights, we're still bad at overcoming tribalism, and basing morality on majority vote isn't necessarily the best idea. That aside, you're right that I also do not assign equal moral standing to humans and nonhumans. However, that does not mean that the same arguments that make me reject culling humans don't also apply to other animals to some degree. I would argue the ethically most defensible approach would be nonlethal fertility regulation.
      • sithadmin 7y ago
        >basing morality on majority vote isn't necessarily the best idea It isn't an idea; it's a reality. Establishing any sort of standard for moral behavior is necessarily an exercise in consensus-building.
        • cygx 7y ago
          And change in that consensus can only driven by those who reject it.