tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post2382505039458892727..comments2023-09-25T08:34:35.073-06:00Comments on Texas Tech Philosophers: Existentialist bear criticized by nature-loving a priorists!Anna Christina Ribeirohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06836932004146803773noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-34607100834916644092007-08-07T03:47:00.000-06:002007-08-07T03:47:00.000-06:00Hi, Im from Melbourne Australia.For a unique under...Hi, Im from Melbourne Australia.<BR/>For a unique understanding of the non-humans please check out:<BR/><BR/>1. www.fearnomorezoo.orgAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-65931244278319236432007-05-26T09:19:00.000-06:002007-05-26T09:19:00.000-06:00It’s true that the most important thing here is th...It’s true that the most important thing here is the animal’s well being, not some empirical standard of “polar-bearness.” It’s also true that, so long as his needs are being met and he is happy, to suggest that he be killed is ridiculous and cruel. However, I have to wonder what those activists mean when they say that human raising is “not appropriate to the species.” Nobody wants to see Cute Knut euthanized because he is, well, cute. And apparently pretty happy. But he’s not going to be a baby forever. And has he grows his needs and behavior will change, too. Many animals have adapted perfectly well to all-human environments, but I have to wonder what if some can't?<BR/><BR/>I can see the argument for euthanization if the result is a maladjusted bear that will become increasingly unhappy as its natural urges<BR/> conflict with its human raising. <BR/><BR/>I’m not making an argument for animal captivity itself, but if we do choose to keep animals in captivity we have a responsibility to the animals, and to ourselves. The result of irresponsible animal handling can lead to horrific situations like this one, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6691171.stm, at the Dallas Zoo when a gorilla escaped from its enclosure, attacking and injuring zoo visitors, including a toddler, before it was shot to death. If we bring an animal into captivity we are responsible for its well-being for its entire life, and if we can anticipate changes in its nature or mood that may put us in the position of having to kill it later on, then is that really any more ethical than euthanizing it as an infant? <BR/><BR/>In Cute Knut’s case, we obviously don’t know-- I have no idea if a polar bear has ever been raised from infancy by humans. If a polar bear can adjust to human foster-parenting and still lead a happy life in captivity then I have no further queries. And, as an animal lover, I really hope that he can.Maggie McCleanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15314258499355080094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-49069184888115512062007-03-27T16:43:00.000-06:002007-03-27T16:43:00.000-06:00It's a hard life for an existentialist bear...on m...It's a hard life for an existentialist bear...on my part I didn't even know polar bears could be existentialists.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05134552574549142396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-22711146350582292222007-03-27T13:56:00.000-06:002007-03-27T13:56:00.000-06:00I guess that means that any 'wolf children' and ot...I guess that means that any 'wolf children' and other Mowgli-types need to be euthanized also.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-54525722455272770392007-03-25T16:50:00.000-06:002007-03-25T16:50:00.000-06:00sorry, i made that last comment.sorry, i made that last comment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-83880511109474027692007-03-25T16:49:00.000-06:002007-03-25T16:49:00.000-06:00Thank you all who think that Knut should be killed...Thank you all who think that Knut should be killed, you have successfully pushed the infinite bound of human stupidity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33505278.post-90145232881168416392007-03-24T10:04:00.000-06:002007-03-24T10:04:00.000-06:00My question is: since when do zoos follow the inst...My question is: since when do zoos follow the instincts of nature? Do they not care for the animals as they keep them *in captivity*? I suppose this highlights the tension involved in having zoos at all. There is something slightly absurd in having animals in an unnatural environment, and then making decisions about their well-being on the basis of what would be 'natural'. Either the objective is for animals to thrive, or for their lives to be 'natural'. If the former, then feed him with a bottle; if the latter, then close down the zoo and put animals back 'where they belong'. I think Allan is right that what makes a life worth living is not whether it is 'natural'--for one, specifying what is 'natural' can be a rather tricky business, what with nature not being a static, but rather a constantly changing, system (whose only constant seems to be, incidentally, the very fact of adaptation of its entities to one another).Anna Christina Ribeirohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06836932004146803773noreply@blogger.com