Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Killing a dying animal, compassion or interfering with nature.
As above, not to mention we are all in a state of delusion. We feel it is unfair to die and it's a tragedy when someone(mostly humans) dies.
Birth and death go together, our lives are seasonal. We don't feel that way because we believe we are controllers of the body/mind. (Though limited)
I guess it was my conditioning from my South African background that made me choose to kill the bird. The idea of trying to take it somewhere else to try and save it did enter my thoughts however I felt based on the state the bird was in that this was only going to delay it's death. Cause more distress and suffering for the already suffering animal.
Where I grew up, if we found an animal that had a chance to survive we would take them to the vet. If the animal was incredibly wounded we would dispatch it as humanely and quickly as possible.
I guess this is why I did what I did.
As for humans being the custodians of the animal kingdom, I would say yes maybe we "could be"
But we need to wake up to reality first. I'm going to do my best to see reality for what it is. I can see in deluded in how I perceived reality and this causes all the problems.
If I was on my way out I would like to be euthanised.
You'd need a damn big rock though.
1
silverIn the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded.USA, Left coast.Veteran
Sleep is timeless. I wouldn't know the difference in the end. The ones who are effected are those who suffer my 'in-between' keeping them from moving on.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited May 2015
Exactly. Do we strive to maintain life because (in the absence of them being conscious enough to make a decision) we know THEY want to live, or because WE want them to live?
Life expectancy has increased enormously, in my lifetime. I remember as a child, that someone dying in their 70's would have been considered to have had a 'good innings'. Now, a person of that age, dying, is considered to have died 'early.'
Much of this increased longevity may be put down to improved lifestyle ( diet, environment, etc.), but a great deal of older people are living longer due to enormous advances in medical circles.
So, are some people being kept alive 'artificially'? Is medicinal know-how perpetuating lives which otherwise would terminate earlier?
I remember reading a poem a long time ago, which parodied the Hippocratic Oath, one line of which, memorably read,
"Thou shalt not kill; yet need not strive
officiously, to keep alive..."
Sometimes I think we can be a bit too darned "advanced " for our own good.
It may sound cruel to say so, and I have no malicious intentions to hurt anyone's feelings, but many babies and children are alive today due to the remarkable, one might even say miraculous intervention of modern medicine and the advanced technology therein.
Even within living memory, some alive today would have died because of an untreatable condition.
In Nature, this has occasionally been referred to as 'Natural Selection'.
An animal born with a physical defect, will not survive.A human being born with the same defect, can be successfully treated and cured, or at the very least, be given a 'good quality of life.'
But by whose standards?
Nature might have brought their lives to an end.
Medical Science has intervened and blocked that option.
Why? What in our psyche has shifted to such an extent, that we believe any action of this kind, is better, cleverer and more "intelligent" than Nature's way?
Is it really?
Of course, some will argue that each case needs to be considered on its own merit.
My question would be, "Ok, let's say that without medical intervention, that human would have died/will die - is 'striving to keep alive' a choice based on emotions, or a survival instinct? "
2
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
Actually, after brief research, the quotation I cited comes from a poem titled "The Latest Decalogue", by Arthur Hugh Clough. A parody of the 10 commandments of which 2 versions exist.
I think about those same things, too, @federica, even as my child is kept alive by medical advances.
We pride ourselves on living longer and longer, but it seems to result in doctors wanting to keep people alive at any and all costs, and I don't personally agree with that kind of medicine. It just continues to feed into our lack of understanding of death and and our fear of it. There is a significant lost opportunity in so many cases to transition in the last phases of our lives. My grandma is almost 90 and has congestive heart failure and COPD. She was very ill a couple of years ago, and was praying to die. She's rather upset that she hasn't died yet, as my grandpa died 32 years ago. But her children are terrified to lose her and I think part of their feeling is what keeps her going despite what she wants. I think if my aunt and uncles weren't hanging for dear life to her life, she probably would have died already. They are missing an opportunity to have some great discussions with her because they refuse to discuss the topic. I have those talks with her. But she feels she will hurt them by dying, so she feels she must fight for them to stay alive in a life she no longer wants to life in a body that has been dying for some time. Medical science of course makes this possible with medications and inhalers and nebulizers and portable O2.
Comments
Birth and death go together, our lives are seasonal. We don't feel that way because we believe we are controllers of the body/mind. (Though limited)
I guess it was my conditioning from my South African background that made me choose to kill the bird. The idea of trying to take it somewhere else to try and save it did enter my thoughts however I felt based on the state the bird was in that this was only going to delay it's death. Cause more distress and suffering for the already suffering animal.
Where I grew up, if we found an animal that had a chance to survive we would take them to the vet. If the animal was incredibly wounded we would dispatch it as humanely and quickly as possible.
I guess this is why I did what I did.
As for humans being the custodians of the animal kingdom, I would say yes maybe we "could be"
But we need to wake up to reality first. I'm going to do my best to see reality for what it is. I can see in deluded in how I perceived reality and this causes all the problems.
If I was on my way out I would like to be euthanised.
You'd need a damn big rock though.
I like the way you think, @Earthninja.
Sleep is timeless. I wouldn't know the difference in the end. The ones who are effected are those who suffer my 'in-between' keeping them from moving on.
Exactly. Do we strive to maintain life because (in the absence of them being conscious enough to make a decision) we know THEY want to live, or because WE want them to live?
Life expectancy has increased enormously, in my lifetime. I remember as a child, that someone dying in their 70's would have been considered to have had a 'good innings'. Now, a person of that age, dying, is considered to have died 'early.'
Much of this increased longevity may be put down to improved lifestyle ( diet, environment, etc.), but a great deal of older people are living longer due to enormous advances in medical circles.
So, are some people being kept alive 'artificially'? Is medicinal know-how perpetuating lives which otherwise would terminate earlier?
I remember reading a poem a long time ago, which parodied the Hippocratic Oath, one line of which, memorably read,
"Thou shalt not kill; yet need not strive
officiously, to keep alive..."
Sometimes I think we can be a bit too darned "advanced " for our own good.
It may sound cruel to say so, and I have no malicious intentions to hurt anyone's feelings, but many babies and children are alive today due to the remarkable, one might even say miraculous intervention of modern medicine and the advanced technology therein.
Even within living memory, some alive today would have died because of an untreatable condition.
In Nature, this has occasionally been referred to as 'Natural Selection'.
An animal born with a physical defect, will not survive.A human being born with the same defect, can be successfully treated and cured, or at the very least, be given a 'good quality of life.'
But by whose standards?
Nature might have brought their lives to an end.
Medical Science has intervened and blocked that option.
Why? What in our psyche has shifted to such an extent, that we believe any action of this kind, is better, cleverer and more "intelligent" than Nature's way?
Is it really?
Of course, some will argue that each case needs to be considered on its own merit.
My question would be, "Ok, let's say that without medical intervention, that human would have died/will die - is 'striving to keep alive' a choice based on emotions, or a survival instinct? "
Actually, after brief research, the quotation I cited comes from a poem titled "The Latest Decalogue", by Arthur Hugh Clough. A parody of the 10 commandments of which 2 versions exist.
I think about those same things, too, @federica, even as my child is kept alive by medical advances.
We pride ourselves on living longer and longer, but it seems to result in doctors wanting to keep people alive at any and all costs, and I don't personally agree with that kind of medicine. It just continues to feed into our lack of understanding of death and and our fear of it. There is a significant lost opportunity in so many cases to transition in the last phases of our lives. My grandma is almost 90 and has congestive heart failure and COPD. She was very ill a couple of years ago, and was praying to die. She's rather upset that she hasn't died yet, as my grandpa died 32 years ago. But her children are terrified to lose her and I think part of their feeling is what keeps her going despite what she wants. I think if my aunt and uncles weren't hanging for dear life to her life, she probably would have died already. They are missing an opportunity to have some great discussions with her because they refuse to discuss the topic. I have those talks with her. But she feels she will hurt them by dying, so she feels she must fight for them to stay alive in a life she no longer wants to life in a body that has been dying for some time. Medical science of course makes this possible with medications and inhalers and nebulizers and portable O2.