Hey Poet, how yah doing?


Guess what??

You think you are superior, and your opinions are the right ones...and
it appears others dont agree with you...

Amazing...fancy that two differing opinions...

in your mind you are right, and sadly have not been able to hear an
opposing veiw, or allow any dialogue to happen....

makes one feel superior huh?

He can't even see that without bacteria he would be nothing,
he doesn't want to admit that at the end of the day nature
is superior

have had better challenges... really.

Am bored with this.

He's been answered and re-answered over and over.

At the end of the day, the weapons destroy the user...

lol... too bad. was such a great topic to begin with...

time to move on and go play

I guess, it is hard to have someone show such an opposing veiw to how
you see the world,

it can almost be a little threatening...

This is one of the things I enjoy here, opposing veiws, opportunities to
hear intelligent reasoning...even when the majority appears to differ in
the thread..

no one is out to change another's mind here, just to cite reasoning, as
to why they have their own...


and Invisible, without bacteria?

Place would get pretty messy....

Hello ET, ( bit weird calling you that...)

My previous post was not directed at you...just came under you...

hehehehe

and yet... fitting, yes? ET LMAO!

Can we go home, yet, ET????

Hey, I never said being "superior" meant we could exist without them.
That's not what superiority means. I'd have to have to go bring up a
dictionary definition to PROVE what "superior" means, it's trite and I'd
like to believe we're smarter than that.


And as to being superior to the rest of you? Well, I didn't resort to
insulting and berating. I kept to respectful points and counterpoints,
and asked you to back up your opinions as I have mine. It may not make
me a better person- but it does make me a stronger debator. I'm sure you
all have strengths in your own areas that overshadow mine. This,
however, is one of my best areas.

And your ideas are different- but hardly "threatening". No more than
someone claiming that clouds are made of taco meat is threatening. I
merely ask you to provide a good reason why you have the opinion you do.
I gave you my points, and I don't see why you can't give me the same
courtesy.

I am not actuaaly trying to insult you, Poet, whatsoever...

nor berate, nor attempt as personal attack...

as an observer, reading back over the whole thread....the first instance
I saw of 'goading', came from you...and your errr...desire for a piece
of steak...please, go back and read it...the steak is still there...

I am not out to change your mind, I am curious to understand how you
arrived at these beliefs, and so far, when you have asked questions, of
others and how they could possibly have these opinions...and you have
been given their resoning, their understandings...you have either
ignored them, or been rather challenging of them..

example, crocodiles...eating young? one of the earlier ones in the
thread...

Well, I changed my mind. The dictionary thing may be "trite"- but, hey,
whatever works.


1 Higher than another in rank, station, or authority: a superior
officer. - Hmm.... only if you accept the spiritual aspect.

2 Of a higher nature or kind. - I think this is the crux of the
question's definition- but then you must define "higher".... and
"nature" for that matter

3 Of great value or excellence; extraordinary. - survival, as the
ultimate measure of success, puts us in the win on this one

4 Greater in number or amount than another: an army defeated by superior
numbers of enemy troops. - Obviously, not. Although we ARE better
organized

5 Affecting an attitude of disdain or conceit; haughty and supercilious.
- Ok, so, this one humans have in the bag.... not that it's a good thing
in this case

6 Above being affected or influenced; indifferent or immune: "Trust
magnates were superior to law" (Gustavus Myers).
Located higher than another; upper. - Of course we're not. Nothing is
untouchable.

7 Botany Inserted or situated above the perianth. Used of an ovary.
8 Printing Set above the main line of type.- neither of these are even
applicable.


9 Logic Of wider or more comprehensive application; generic. Used of a
term or proposition. - we are "wider" and "more comprehensive" in our
applications. Nothing spreads like we spread.


So, of NINE definitions of "superior". We've got a couple irrelevant. We
have three definate "yes"- one definate "no"- and three debatable
points.

"Amazing...fancy that two differing opinions...

in your mind you are right, and sadly have not been able to hear an
opposing veiw, or allow any dialogue to happen....

makes one feel superior huh?"


You call that anything other than insults in the form of ironic
sarcasm?

I have a different veiw with number nine...

and of course is arguable, depending on the place you sit with
beliefs...

9 Logic Of wider or more comprehensive application; generic. Used of a
term or proposition. - we are "wider" and "more comprehensive" in our
applications. Nothing spreads like we spread.


It is the 'nothing spreads like we spread' comment...

once again, (and I am sure you have figured where I believe we sit in
the whole food chain, evolutionary side of things)

I have to disagree.. bacteria is the be all and end all...in my
opinion...we cannot control it, as quickly as we get a grip on one
disease...Plague for instance, AIDS, HIV, and these all fall under the
virus, bacteria genre, there are another 50 strains, mutated ready to
do it's thing...

Without bacteria, there would be no decomposition, the world would get
pretty messy..all those bodies piled up...

we do so well at surviving at the top of the heap as a species...I give
you that...but we are underneath something else in my books...we are not
at the very top..

I've heard the other arguments. I've acknowleged that we cannot be
truly INDEPENDENT. But that doesn't mean we're not superior. If we build
a house of cards, the top card cannot stand without those under it. But
that doesn't change its status as top card.


I've played the "subjectivity" game to its innevitable conclusion- if
all is relative, then nothing matters, and there's no true answer to
anything.


I've played the "human action vs animal behavior" card. And got the
subjectivity response. Nothing concrete against me in that argument.


I mean, really, WHAT MORE COULD YOU POSSIBLY ASK FOR.


Oh, and the steak thing wasn't goading. I really did want a steak. I
settled for pizza. And in the process, ended up eating three different
species of animal.

Does anyone here think there's anything so morally wrong with that that
it's the quivilant to murder and cannibalism of three human beings?

Oh, and just because something is "inferior" doesn't make it
undeserving of compassion and mercy. Killing an animal is one thing.
Torturing it in the process is quite another. We do our best to help
members of our own species that, for whatever reason, are not blessed
with the same abilities as the rest of their kin.


We're dependent on lower lifeforms to provide us with the necessities
of life. Nothing's built to do it all by themselves. Although humans,
one day, will probably be advanced enough, scientifically, to live
solely with the aid of our machinery. Heck, we may just genetically
alter ourselves to the point of absolute survival without any other
organisms.


Of course, that potential "chain" in evolution DOES bother me. Creation
is the ultimate work of art, and our dependency upon it makes our
appreciation of it that much deeper.

Hey everybody, I'm back and as usual I think this time zone thing has me
really behind, so I'm gonna jump right in.

Absolutely love the way this has developed. You all have very differing
views. If I were in the state of being a questioning christian, an
agnostic, I think, Poet you might just have given me some grounds for
falling on the soul side of the fence. But then along comes Abra,
offering me this other option, a way view the nature of christianity,
without the seperatness that I never could figure out. All the other
options, TLW, that you were able to come by your beliefs, having been
raised a Catholic, clearly shows that you were not held back by the
strick nature of that sect. Instead you try to encompass a thoughtful
way to allow your religion and your questions to co-exist. Jess and
ET, all of you that have developed a way to view the world and connect
with your 'spirtuality' that embraces a unity, and connectivity of all
matter is beautiful.

It seems to me in viewing all the posts thus far that what we have are
two issues here. One being the definition of superiority. As far as
definition, Poet provided the acceptible dictionary version. Given that
definition, I can only say this; in a one on one confrontation man to
beast, neither having prepared for this conrontation, there are many
that we would not defeat, many. Yet when it comes to adapting our
environment to our needs, and comforts and pleasures, instead of
environmentally suitible options, then hands down we are superior. Now
if you take the whole of mankind and drop us into the middle of a war
with all of the beasts, all those OTHER animals on this planet, could
we, would we win? And if we did succeed in destroying every living
creature, what reason then would we have to be superior and what would
we 'reign' over. You see the point, don't you. Without all the other
living creatures we are superior only to each other and that superiority
will ultimatly come down to what abra has been saying all along.

But wait, I'm not done yet, but I'll start a new reply, let some of
you digest this one.

You know, citing bacteria isn't entirely fair. After all- if ALL
bacteria are ONE. Then all the animals, down to the lowest protozoan,
would be counted as one. Bacteria are a vast catagory, encompansing many
millions of species. Im fact, some bacterial life is so alien that some
biologists have proposed creating a new taxonomical catagory called
"Domain" that is above kingdoms. So if you took that state, all plants,
animals, fungi, and whatever that last type is- all at once against the
bacteria. Either way, bacteria, not fair. Unless you limit to one
species at a time.


And.... if it came to a war between us and all other beasts.... we'd be
essentially screwed. If we WON, we'd still lose. Although we do have the
dubius status as "one creature actually capable of destroying all life".

I keep thinking of the words interconnected, interdependent, coexist.
How can one be superior if you can't live without the rest?

By the way, I forgot to say, how much I admire the attempts here of each
of you to include a little humor. Poet, sometimes people forget, that
you tend to have a sarcastic nature and an ironic tone in your writing.
Abra, has a dry sense of humor also and many of you, seem to like the,
surprised you said that approach.
Makes posting more fun this way.

Now, here are some of the things that I found in my questioning years,
that I was unable to reconcile with logically.

I have always viewed the universe, no matter how big that universe was
to me at the time, as something whole. When I saw a new creature for
the fist time and learned it had a name, I somehow, automatically,
related that name to the casing that encapsulated the essence of the
universe. Now, grant it, when I was very young I could not have
explained that, it was a sence, a feeling. I have memories of being a
'baby' as far back as the age of 2. One of my most vivid memories,
still today, was when I was about three. I would wake up and stand at
the edge of my crib looking out the window above me, waiting for the sun
to shine. When it did I would hold up my arms and giggle at the embrace
I gave the sun. I felt like part of it.
Yes, my parents thought I was strange, but they had no idea yet how
strange.
So, when I got to the age where Sunday School and it's teachings were
being presented, I never quite got it. Not till I was a teenager, about
16 did I even know what I was questioning. I began to realize that to
have this faith, to believe as 'they' all did, was to give up everything
I felt a part of. All those wonderful things I saw everyday in nature.
What does this have to do with anything? I may have indeed been
weird, but I thing the weird thing was that I had this ability to
remember my feelings, and to connect those feelings with words as I got
older. Those words told me that what I felt was part of a whole, the
whole of nature, the whole of the universe, not seperate.
I was in my 20's when a discussion with friends revealed to me how
little memory poeple have of their youth. From that time to this, I
still ask people, what is your earliest memory, and each time I'm
surpirsed by the answer.
You see, I think, maybe, we all begin that way. Ever see a baby or
very young child looking out the window and reaching for something, or
talking to a flower or a lady bug or spider in their baby babble?
Maybe we all feel that way, maybe it's the conditioning of a world of
others that continues to carry on, hand down that same conditioning.
That we are seperated from the whole and in order to find the way back
we must be good enough, faithful enough, and so on. Even those with no
religious training will tell you, they believe in a higher power,
because they have been conditioned by those around them.

So what do ya think? Poet, constructive please.

Kid at heart, you have not missed the point that several are trying to
make.