English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

... natural order of the world ( balance of nature )?

2006-07-30 13:42:47 · 15 answers · asked by rodneycrater 3 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

15 answers

If I could catch the kitten to remove the thorn, I would immediately let it go afterwards, and wouldn't concern myself about "disrupting the natural order of the world." I would rest much easier, knowing that I helped to ease this small creature's pain.

2006-07-30 16:01:07 · answer #1 · answered by Caroline 5 · 1 0

Some of those who have answered you think that just because we are natural beings who cannot help but obey the laws of nature we cannot disrupt the balance of nature.

What are science and technology if they are not finding out what the laws of nature are and applying them to our advantage? Technology does not break the laws of nature, on the contrary, it relies upon them remaining just as they are.

However, the laws of nature and the 'balance of nature' are not the same thing. We disrupt the balance of nature when we use technology to live our lives in a way that conflicts with the way this planet's natural cycles and systems function. And the more of us there are of us who live that way the bigger the disruption becomes.

Environmentalism is not about what individuals do to or for individuals, it's about what we humans are increasingly doing to this planet's natural systems.

Pulling a thorn from a kitten's paw would have no effect on the balance of nature that could not be absorbed by nature's systems with no trouble at all. The problem is one of practical scale, not of theoretical principle.

If you are suggesting that helping the kitten implies the principle that we should protect all wild animals from harm, such a principle would of course be ludicrous in practical terms, and, being so, is ludicrous also in theoretic terms. Protecting all wild animals from harm is a ludicrous idea; helping one kitten would be kindness, but would imply nothing for envirnmental ethics.

2006-07-30 23:55:22 · answer #2 · answered by brucebirdfield 4 · 0 0

We as human beings are part of the balance of nature. Just because we think and act with a higher mode of intelligence, doesn't mean we are above the natural order of the world. We are a part of it... If we didn't remove that thorn, did we disrupt the order by choosing not to do anything though we are able?

2006-07-30 20:50:29 · answer #3 · answered by Golden Sphinx 3 · 0 0

Kittens are domesticated animals - any wild kitten has come from a dumped domestic animal. The disruption of the natural order of the world occurred when some human behaved irresponsibly. So.....the question is, would you be restoring the balance of nature if you removed the thorn and rescued the kitten. What if you take it home, tame it, and have it desexed??

2006-08-03 04:54:52 · answer #4 · answered by wondering 3 · 0 0

The 'good thing' is also a part of the natural order of the world; even if one were to do nothing. Therefore, whatever decision you make, you would not be disrupting the natural order of the world, as you are a part of it.

2006-07-30 22:51:16 · answer #5 · answered by Source 4 · 0 0

You assume that those two choices are mutually exclusive. They aren't. We humans and everything we do are every bit a part of the "natural world." Homo sapiens are animals too, we're just more clever at using tools!

Even if you reject that, still sometimes it's better to disrupt the "natural order of the world." We do that every time we practice medicine. The extinction of smallpox as a disease, for example, was a definite good!

2006-07-30 20:49:32 · answer #6 · answered by R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution 7 · 0 0

I would remove the thorn, and since she was tame enough for me to get that close, I would take her home and try to find her a home of her own.

But this is a Philosophy question. Hmmmm.... I would do the same thing. Removing a thorn would make the poor wild thing's life easier. One organism helping another has got to be a good thing.

2006-07-30 20:49:15 · answer #7 · answered by Matilda 4 · 0 0

We may live in the natural world, but we are by no means bound by the rules of nature(i,e we don't leave our young to die if they come out deformed like animals do, we sometimes kill just for the sake of killing "hunting for sport".) We do a lot of things differently. We by nature completely go against nature. Heck, we are at the top of the food chain and some of us decide to eat nothing but rabbit food! Nature would say leave the thorn alone,but those rules don't apply to us do they? so go ahead, give him a break pull it out.

2006-07-30 22:52:05 · answer #8 · answered by m 3 · 0 0

We are told that we are part of nature, and all part of GOD"S great plan.

So I say that no good deed goes without notice.

Take the thorn out , who knows the thorn may have been allowed to be there to see if there is enough love in you to trust God in all things.

Would you want someone to take a thorn out ofm your foot if you were unable to do it your self ?

Love is a wonderful thing when it is shared, even among kingdoms.

LOVE YA

no you would not be dissrupting , only becomming part of what you already were part of.

2006-07-30 20:52:03 · answer #9 · answered by ? 2 · 0 0

As humans we stuff up the natural order of things everyday by knocking down forests anyway, so why not help the poor kitten since we've already crossed that line. And who says that you being there to be able to help the kitten isn't part of the natural order of things anyway?

2006-07-30 20:46:56 · answer #10 · answered by jadevandersee 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers