It has been said that that there are more bacteria cells than human cells in the body. Then we have to consider our function on this planet - if the main goal of humans is to reproduce and consume natural resources at an exponential rate then cant it be said that humans are nothing more than a group of viruses - albeit complex ones?
2007-10-07 15:37:29 · 13 answers · asked by ǝɯɐuɹǝsn ɔıɹǝuǝƃ 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
YES.
2007-10-07 15:39:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, technically a virus is a genetic sequence in a shell, with some tool (like a syringe) for injecting itself into a host. It produces nothing on its own and relies completely on the host for all its needs.
Human cells are like little factories, we produce various chemicals like Vitamin D and insulin. So we're not really viruses.
I think any animal, plant or other organism, given enough food and the right conditions, will reproduce exponentially, so humans are not really special in that sense.
The only difference is that humans have the ability to greatly modify the environment to always give themselves the right conditions to reproduce.
In fact our ability to change the environment to permit our own reproduction greatly exceeds our general wisdom in doing it responsibly.
2007-10-08 09:04:50 · answer #2 · answered by James P 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Have you been watching The Matrix again?
Reproduction is the primary goal of any life form. All life needs to consume resources in order to reproduce. Humans, by developing language, culture, and other technologies, have become particularly good at consuming and reproducing.
"Parasite" is a loosely defined word, and tends to carry negative implications. If we can say anything about what sets parasites apart from other life forms, it is that they tend to weaken and eventually destroy their host organism. If we look at the entire earth as the host organism for humanity, and we eventually destroy this planet, I suppose we must be defined as parasites.
Of course, by that point, it doesn't really matter what we call ourselves, does it?
2007-10-07 22:49:56 · answer #3 · answered by Kristian D 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It's funny you should ask this question. The VERY SAME THING was suggest on my local radio station a few months back, saying that humans are nothing more than parasites who have totally over-populated this world. They even said that to try to cut down on pollution, over-building of houses and too many people, new parents should have only ONE child-per-family.
I know it's a disgusting word, but yes, humans are indeed parasites in the world. I'm very sorry.
2007-10-11 18:39:27 · answer #4 · answered by highland_white_wolf 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is a choice. For most of history, until the last hundred or so years, Humanity has lived in harmony with Nature. It is now, with massive uncontrolled breeding, that we are no longer contributing to the well being of the Earth.
2007-10-07 23:36:11 · answer #5 · answered by phil8656 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Aren't all living things "parasites" since they all leech resources from the Earth?
2007-10-07 23:54:29 · answer #6 · answered by mouse 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Anything living needs energy. Everything eats something else. Everything is a parasite.
2007-10-07 23:57:59 · answer #7 · answered by ~~~~~ 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
An interesting thought, what a great plot for a movie.
2007-10-07 23:00:42 · answer #8 · answered by talloolah 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would have to say yes. We feed off of the earth and give back very little compared to what we take from it.
2007-10-07 23:17:16 · answer #9 · answered by romer151 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Since we actually produce more than we consume the premise of your position is inaccurate.
2007-10-07 22:45:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
the rock that we live on is not alive, this is different than a tick on a dog.
2007-10-07 22:49:37 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋