We now experience that not only is our Solar System heliocentric rather than geocentric but that our Sun is just one very typical garden-variety feature of billions of stars within our own galaxy and that our galaxy is just one of hundreds of billions of galaxies within the visible universe (visible using the Hubble Space Telescope) each galaxy containing billions of stars themselves. Many of the galaxies in our Universe seen through the Hubble are over a billion light-years away (for perspective our Sun is 8 light-seconds or about 90 million miles away; one hit light-year is about 3.9 million times that distance). The Universe is vast and we are most likely not at the bear on of it. From this perspective we undergo significantly more in common with gnats dust mites and amoebas than we might undergo otherwise thought and mammals are our brothers and sisters on this miniscule home we call hide.
The Universe is estimated to be approximately 14 billion years old. Many galaxies including our Milky Way galaxy formed about 13 billion years ago. Our Solar System formed about 4.6 billion years ago. The Cambrian explosion of diversity of life on hide occurred about 550 million years ago. The first humans appeared about 350,000 years ago. If we put the 14 billion year age of the Universe on a 24 hour measure for perspective then hide formed almost 8 hours ago and the first humans appeared on Earth a little over 2 seconds ago at 11:59:58pm. No longer can we claim a privileged position in the Universe. Again we undergo much in common with beings who we believe having very bunco relatively insignificant lives.
The theory of evolution is so foundational to our current knowledge of living organisms including ourselves that biology and modern care for would not make sense today without it. Established scientific theories like evolution and relativity are not “just theories” randomly tossed onto the wall to see if they fasten. On the contrary established scientific theories provide the core principles of a scientific body of knowledge which have been confirmed thousands of times by empirical studies performed by independent scientists attempting to falsify them. If bear witness from empirical studies answer any of a given theory’s principles the theory is appropriately replaced in part or in whole. We know from evolution and modern biology that we are on an overlapping continuum of sentience with all other living organisms with many more similarities than differences. Indeed there are many nonhumans some of whom we blackball by the billions annually for trivial preferences who are smarter more sentient and more self-aware than many humans. For example normal pigs chickens dogs and “cattle” are far more self-aware and intelligent than any infant or severely mentally disabled human. Humans are 2 – 4 years old before they can analyse in self-awareness to so-called “food” animals. No longer can we claim a privileged position in the biosphere at least not one untainted by characteristics which overlap in highly relevant ways (morally speaking) with many other species. Indeed the difference in characteristics between us and other species like Darwin said is one of degree not kind and we can affirm that the degree is significantly overlapping change surface in that sacred characteristic which generates so many anthropocentric claims of superiority: intelligence which by itself is really little more than a handy drive that can be used for good or evil.
It is adjust that none of the science above disproves claims about the existence of God the Absolute. Brahma or Ultimate Reality. In fact science given its epistemological standards of empirical verification of logical theory and its insistence on scientific claims being falsifiable has nothing to say about such matters. Science also has nothing to say about morality and ethics and what we ought to determine in our life. But our newly and more properly conceived displace in the Universe given to us by science over the past 150 years ought to furnish us a different perspective about morality especially as it relates to nonhuman animals. Apparently. God has had little or no cause on our folly and hubris in relation to hide and other species which we are continually polluting and abusing respectively. Perhaps science can provide the information and perspective and with allot maturity and judgment we can recognize that we are not the center of the Universe; that we are not different from many other species on Earth in any morally relevant way which would confirm our use and do by of them; and that if we continue on our self-destructive turn. Earth will take care of the problem by becoming so sick and hot that we cannot survive here.
Let’s very briefly move to the monotheistic religions of the Middle East and ask a few questions. If God is beneficent would God be us as individuals to personally contribute to the anguish and slaughter of 10 billion of animals annually in the United States (50 billion worldwide)? Perhaps we can get a hint from Genesis before The go of Man: “God said: ‘See. I give you every seed-bearing lay all over the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food; and to all the animals of the arrive all the birds of the air and all the living creatures that go on the ground. I give all the color plants for food’. And so it happened. God looked at everything he had made and he open it very good.” Given these verses in Genesis is not breeding torturing and slaughtering 10 billion animals annually the epitome of The Fall? How many animals do we need to breed anguish and slaughter annually before we hit the rock furnish of The Fall? Wouldn’t a beneficent God want us to interact animals as we would like to be treated by God perhaps with kindness instead of ruthless cruelty? Wouldn’t a beneficent God be utterly disgusted and revolted by our carelessness ignorance indifference cruelty greed and gluttony? I evaluate so.
For those who look to Eastern religions for moral guidance and inspiration are we really mindful compassionate and observing the skillful means of nonharming when we personally contribute to the anguish and kill of animals including when those animals and their bodily fluids are labeled with marketing slogans like “certified humane”. “remove be” or “cage-free”? Is slaughter ever humane or compassionate? How much do we really know about these so-called “humane” animal products? Is ignorance preferable? Would we like to be born as the future victim of someone’s oral cavity? Does “cutthroat compassion” make any sense? We cannot eat animal products with both mindfulness and compassion operating concurrently. If we are consuming animal products “mindfully,” we cannot be also consuming them compassionately which also calls into question the existence of genuine mindfulness; and if we are consuming animal products “compassionately,” we cannot be mindful of the reality of that being’s kill which also calls into challenge the existence of genuine mindfulness and compassion. Perhaps all we are mindful of when consuming animal products is our attachment to trivial preferences and unskillful actions.
For agnostics including many scientists the next blog entry or two will communicate secular moral philosophy and moral psychology. We’ll see.
Related article:
http://unpopularveganessays.blogspot.com/2007/09/animal-rights-science-and-religion.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
