11-16-2012, 02:10 PM
(11-16-2012, 01:49 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Great summary, Shin'Ar!
(11-16-2012, 01:25 PM)ShinAr Wrote: Again I ask, respect and compassion based upon what degree of evolved understanding?
Yes, this is where we delved into our side conversation, and I have pretty much the same question.
There is a notion which says that it is wrong or somehow unfair to exalt humans over animals. Or that we should "respect" animals by extending to them the same rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" that we have (supposedly) given ourselves.
In my analysis of this proposition, I find myself saying OK. But then, why just the animals? Why stop there?
If it is wrong for humans to exalt ourselves over other lifeforms, then isn't it just as wrong to exalt the animal kingdom over the others? Who are we to say that the animals are more important than the bacteria, or the algae, or the fungi, or the plants?
Precisely, who/what are we? And that is where the posts above attempt to answer that question.
That question is the one burden that all who attempt to judge or place expectations of The Other must answer of The Other.
In every expectation, no matter how they attempt to contrive it, that question shall be asked.
And if one considers what I have proposed above for the answer, a process of being must concede to the process in all of its aspects.
That is not to say that each path does not have very critical consequences, or that we should not discern our own paths and possible consequences.
It just means that we simply cannot deny The Other its Mystery and freedom, or we deny it ourselves.