Animal Debate

[not zinnia]

[...]
What if...
The animal abuser did not know it was wrong? I'd like to point out a medical diesease which means people do not have feelings such as empathy and sympathy, and do not understand the concept of those.

Interesting point you've got there. Sociopaths are very hard to detect under normal conditions. Also, they will never see their actions as inappropriate [how ever inappropriate they actually are], therefore giving them no reason to see what they're doing is wrong. But someone would be able to find out eventually if they were doing some crazy experiments with their pets.

@Yes Man:

Even if someone had a mental issue that didn't allow them to know sympathy and empathy doesn't mean they don't understand the concept of consiquence. If creatures react negatively to what they are doing, they would be aware they were doing something "bad".

Therein lies the problem -- Sociopaths don't have that type of connection. They do see the suffering and the consequences. That doesn't mean they feel the consequences.

If there was a person... oh say, with schizophrenia, and one of their auditory hallucinations told them to choke their pet, they most certainly would. But that person will have other people around them 24/7 ensuring they don't do anything to harm themselves or others, including pets if need be.

I doubt anyone living alone with a government-verified mental condition is even allowed to own a pet, so I'd say that's just a dead end.
//Sorry, I'm such a psychological nerd. x3

[Wishful Thinking.]

About the 'putting humans in the wild w/o technology'
Well, the Natives did it, didn't they? No technology whatsoever. So I think our generation actually has a good chance of survival in the wild, given that we know more about nature than our ancestors.

Not true at all and I am part Native American! Our ancestors know way more about this earth and survival then we ever could!!

[NightFlame22]

About the 'putting humans in the wild w/o technology'
Well, the Natives did it, didn't they? No technology whatsoever. So I think our generation actually has a good chance of survival in the wild, given that we know more about nature than our ancestors.

Not true at all and I am part Native American! Our ancestors know way more about this earth and survival then we ever could!!

I meant scientifically.
I know what you mean, things should've stayed simple like that. I'm part NA too. :3

[van]

About the 'putting humans in the wild w/o technology'
Well, the Natives did it, didn't they? No technology whatsoever. So I think our generation actually has a good chance of survival in the wild, given that we know more about nature than our ancestors.

Not true at all and I am part Native American! Our ancestors know way more about this earth and survival then we ever could!!

As time goes on, we learn more. The native Americans were in the past and we have learned about them and learned from their mistakes, so yes, we know more than them. We may not be accustomed to said actions we know of, but we know more.

[maetropa]

[...]
What if...
The animal abuser did not know it was wrong? I'd like to point out a medical diesease which means people do not have feelings such as empathy and sympathy, and do not understand the concept of those.

Interesting point you've got there. Sociopaths are very hard to detect under normal conditions. Also, they will never see their actions as inappropriate [how ever inappropriate they actually are], therefore giving them no reason to see what they're doing is wrong. But someone would be able to find out eventually if they were doing some crazy experiments with their pets.

@Yes Man:

Even if someone had a mental issue that didn't allow them to know sympathy and empathy doesn't mean they don't understand the concept of consiquence. If creatures react negatively to what they are doing, they would be aware they were doing something "bad".

Therein lies the problem -- Sociopaths don't have that type of connection. They do see the suffering and the consequences. That doesn't mean they feel the consequences.

If there was a person... oh say, with schizophrenia, and one of their auditory hallucinations told them to choke their pet, they most certainly would. But that person will have other people around them 24/7 ensuring they don't do anything to harm themselves or others, including pets if need be.

I doubt anyone living alone with a government-verified mental condition is even allowed to own a pet, so I'd say that's just a dead end.
//Sorry, I'm such a psychological nerd. x3

I laff you xD
I'm interested in psychology as well, genetics

Ahem, anyway
This is a good points and stuff c:

[4kcuo]

About the 'putting humans in the wild w/o technology'
Well, the Natives did it, didn't they? No technology whatsoever. So I think our generation actually has a good chance of survival in the wild, given that we know more about nature than our ancestors.

Not true at all and I am part Native American! Our ancestors know way more about this earth and survival then we ever could!!

I meant scientifically.
I know what you mean, things should've stayed simple like that. I'm part NA too. :3

We'd be better off as NAs, when you think about it. Much more healthier.

[NightFlame22]

@ Arachnid
So true, so true. It'd not only be better for humans, but for the environment as well. We wouldn't have to worry about pollution or maybe even animal abuse. Strong beliefs in animal spirits.

[Wishful Thinking.]

About the 'putting humans in the wild w/o technology'
Well, the Natives did it, didn't they? No technology whatsoever. So I think our generation actually has a good chance of survival in the wild, given that we know more about nature than our ancestors.

Not true at all and I am part Native American! Our ancestors know way more about this earth and survival then we ever could!!

I meant scientifically.
I know what you mean, things should've stayed simple like that. I'm part NA too. :3

Yes, things should have always stayed that simple! Their population was fine and they keep balance with the other life around them. As us now and days, we humans are less healthy, more lazy and I say if you put someone who as always lived with things being given to them, and never spend much time outside in the wild, I'd find it amusing and they won't have not even the slightest chance of survival as our ancestors did.

[Wishful Thinking.]

@ Arachnid
So true, so true. It'd not only be better for humans, but for the environment as well. We wouldn't have to worry about pollution or maybe even animal abuse. Strong beliefs in animal spirits.

True!! I also strongly believe in animal spirit guides!

[not zinnia]

I laff you xD
I'm interested in psychology as well, genetics

Ahem, anyway
This is a good points and stuff c:

Heheh <33 ;D
I have no idea what to say so...
Ahem. You've made some very good points yourself.
//I'm awkward~

So yeah.
@Native American Convo: OhgodOhgodOhgod, I don't want to start trouble or anything, but Native Americans got their butts handed to them once the colonists came over due to guns and superior intelligence. The NA's weren't technologically advanced, therefore couldn't survive in today's world by any standards.
Would you rather be living under the rule of some other, stronger country... or be free Americans? ;-;
My point is, if it weren't for the way history went down, you wouldn't be able to enjoy the luxury of a simplistic life such as that.