Longleat - it's a famous safari park in England, well-known for it's positive treatment and enclosures that are more realistic and natural than any zoo.
seeing animals locked up in cages makes me want to cry. we have no right whatsoever to trap them and just put them in cages for the sake of entertainment.
They used to be put in cages for 'entertainment', cages that were hardly big enough for them to walk around in, and were basically just a concrete floor with iron bars all around. Nowadays, animals are in specially designed enclosures, filled with entertainment for the animals themselves, and they have enough space to feel comfortable and behave as naturally as possible. Yes captivity is not ideal, but the positives far outweigh the negatives. Zoo animals are educating people about their wild counterparts, raising money for their wild counterparts' habitats, and also providing a way for their species to not become extinct.
deleted
· 10 years ago
They make it sound like that but I've volunteered at zoos. It's not all that great and it's not the same it's not how animals should be treated. They were' made to be fed meat they were meant to hunt it.
Seriously? How are we better?
We have leaders that oppress, torture and kill their own people.
We wage wars upon one another, to stop such people, as well as to obliterate other peoples that pose no threat.
We have gone so far as to create weapons that are capable of ending ALL life on Earth.
We kill one another because they look, speak or think differently, despite causing one another no harm.
We destroy the world around us because it's the easier thing to do - we could act more environmentally friendly, but we don't, because that would be more expensive and our species revolves around this concept of monetary currency that we created.
We use this money to allow a few to rise to power, yet allow it to cage the majority of our kind.
And don't even get me started on the damage of religion.
So seriously, we ARE just animals; we may have evolved further to use things like trains and computers, but do not mistake this for being better. We simply became more intelligently savage.
I did not argue we were not the most intelligent creature; I argue that we are not the best. There is a HUGE difference between the two - being clever does not make you better.
Intelligence is the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills - something humanity as a species excels at.
"Best" is the superlative of good, meaning the most good. Being good is the possession or displaying of moral virtue - so the ability to make kind, caring and positive decisions. Therefore, "best" would be describing humanity as the most caring, most kind and positively impactful species on the planet - something I don't think we qualify for what with all our motiveless killing, oppression and cruelty. It's a shame that we, the cleverest of species, can't think of a way for humans to live in harmony with each other and the rest of the world.
We overruled them all, we are powerful. We won earth dude. Come on, we are the best animal. Clearly. Maybe not peace wise, but intelligence and wisdom we crush dolphins, kangaroos, and dogs. Just to name a few. Give me one animal that is better than a human.
Again, you're not simply understanding the difference between being BEST versus being the most 'intelligent' or 'powerful'. "Best" is a moral, ethical status, whereas being intelligent and powerful are more quantifiable judgements. I cannot answer your demand as we do not agree on the definition of "better".
You asked a question, I answered; you made an argument, I made a counter-argument. I'm not taking it too seriously, you just simply don't fully understand the language you are using. Therefore others who don't understand the difference between words would agree with you, while those that do understand the simple differences between different words would agree with me - and I'm fairly certain that more than 10% would agree with me, given most people get the difference between power, intelligence and goodness (especially after I explained it to you two or three times). You just seem to be taking what I say personally, rather than listening to what I'm explaining.
I just realised your trolling, that's a good one. In case your not, I don't know what kind of guy you are, but with the name specialagentjesus I thought you wouldn't be so serious about a conversation that doesn't even matter at all. Your saying just because we have the most power and intelligence that doesn't make us the best? Who are you?
We have leaders that oppress, torture and kill their own people.
We wage wars upon one another, to stop such people, as well as to obliterate other peoples that pose no threat.
We have gone so far as to create weapons that are capable of ending ALL life on Earth.
We kill one another because they look, speak or think differently, despite causing one another no harm.
We destroy the world around us because it's the easier thing to do - we could act more environmentally friendly, but we don't, because that would be more expensive and our species revolves around this concept of monetary currency that we created.
We use this money to allow a few to rise to power, yet allow it to cage the majority of our kind.
And don't even get me started on the damage of religion.
So seriously, we ARE just animals; we may have evolved further to use things like trains and computers, but do not mistake this for being better. We simply became more intelligently savage.
"Best" is the superlative of good, meaning the most good. Being good is the possession or displaying of moral virtue - so the ability to make kind, caring and positive decisions. Therefore, "best" would be describing humanity as the most caring, most kind and positively impactful species on the planet - something I don't think we qualify for what with all our motiveless killing, oppression and cruelty. It's a shame that we, the cleverest of species, can't think of a way for humans to live in harmony with each other and the rest of the world.