6 ms·
Why would you choose not to have empathy for a living creature?
by invalidusernam3 1mo ago
Why would you choose not to have empathy for a living creature?
- shaky-carrousel 1mo agoBecause lice are also living creatures. And I have no empathy for them, and hopefully never will.
- yawpitch 1mo agoI do, and I hopefully will eventually get to leeches too.
- marliechiller 1mo agoLice have no choice in their lot in the universe. Do you think if they had intelligence the ability to choose their lot that they would choose their current one again? I doubt it personally. You can detest their mode of existence whilst still having empathy for them I think
- inigyou 1mo agoCounterexample: Humans are lice to the ecosystem of Earth, and we choose to be that way.
- ktm5j 1mo agoWhy would you have empathy for something that is literally incapable of things like empathy. Or any kind of emotion or thought. This is ridiculous guys, you might as well have empathy for a rock.
- yawpitch 1mo agoIt’s pretty easy to empathize with a rock, actually… they pretty much always feel stoned.
- internetter 1mo agowhere do you draw the line? (I sound like PETA). But it's a valid question. for instance, I have empathy for dolphins, and for elephants. I have empathy for cows, despite eating them. They are more smart than we give them credit for. I have empathy for a bee when I must kill it, and certainly for the broader colony and species. I don't think I have empathy for lice or ticks or mosquitoes, but where on earth is that line, and what does it represent?
- ktm5j 1mo agoWe don't necessarily have to draw that line right now, we're talking about lice. Also, there is no way that dolphins are incapable of emotions, when my dog is capable of emotions. I know there's some disagreement on that subject.. but I see him displaying, let's call it "relatable behaviors", all the time. I didn't give him a treat, he got disappointed.. that sort of thing. Empathy is essentially feeling the emotions of others, they need to have emotions in the first place.
- osjdiwjdej 1mo ago> I doubt it personally. This is precisely why this discussion is best never had. It’s nonsensical. It’s the stuff sci-fi writers come up with because reality doesn’t allow for it. You cannot in any way discuss any part of this subject with a straight face because it is all made up inside your own head. Everything that you think you understand, or feel, is made up solely to justify your argument. There’s no facts here, only ”vibes”.
- ACCount37 1mo ago"A living creature" is a low fucking bar. Bacteria are living creatures. And your body is wired to exterminate them so that they don't eat it alive from the inside. Because the moment those defenses falter, they will do exactly that. Consider saving your empathy for things that matter.
- agilemonkey 1mo agoWithout these very same bacteria, you would not be able to live.
- ACCount37 1mo agoSome labs made bacteria-free mice for research purposes. They're viable. So "not be able to live" is a stretch. Human body does use some bacteria in the guts, but a lot of those very same bacteria would absolutely try to eat the entire body if its immune defenses ever failed.
- osjdiwjdej 1mo agoWhich is why the body uses those that it finds useful and absolutely murder those that it deems harmful. It’s nature. Just nature. And it’s such a nonsensical discussion to have that the only reason for it to happen at any given time is to satisfy the ego of those saying “nuh-uh!!”.