> "Situational ethics" refers to changing your ethic based on the
> situation. I didn't do that. I used the same ethic in both
> examples: _what's best for humans_.
>
> Now, if the ethic to be used is _give animals equal rights_, then
> shooting a hungry alligator that's about to eat a child WOULD be
> situational ethics.
> Al
i have been reading this discussion with interest and one thought has been
continually popping up. We are a balance with nature, or should be. it
doesn't matter whether there is a hierarchy or not humans will always be
speciocentric. if we were to be pragmatic we would leave forests and there
ecosystems intact for the good of all. we wouldn't use animals as tourist
attractions and then blame the animal if it eats whats on offer - a small
child perhaps? it's all in how you look at it.
there are too many humans. we keep on multiplying and nothing is our
predator - except the occasional alligator ;) its all a matter of balance.
Respectfully,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Interesting: Your people glorified organised violence for 40 centuries,
but you imprison those who employ it privately."
Mr Spock. Star Trek 'Dagger of the Mind'
