Russow

One thing that immediately strikes me is how she says she can't say that it's wrong to deprive an individual animal from its natural habitat. She starts the essay describing why it would be silly to compare a species to another calling one more important than another, then moves on to say this. But humans are a species just like any other out there. Do we allow humans to be kept captive against their will? So why are we doing so to other species?

Dealing with Anthropocentricism

First of all, I hope I spelled that right

But, do you think it's okay to work through our problems with an anthropocentric view for now?
We can use that view and apply it the best we can to other animals to imagine what their views and values might be. Maybe in doing so it would make for an easier transition into a non-anthropocentric view

Anthropocentric

It seems as if it's impossible maintain a view that isn't in some way anthropocentric. Now this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but more so just a fact of life. It is a view we can't escape simply can't escape because we can only see the world through our own eyes. But there have been studies with great apes of people teaching them sign language that have garnered quite a bit of information. Perhaps this is a step in the right direction. In a very small sense, we were using the same language and could understand each other . Experiments like these are a huge step in seeing the world through the eyes of other creatures, and moving away from an anthropocentric state of mind.

Non-Human Persons

So I brought this up in class recently but here it is again.

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/09/17/india-declares-dolphins-whales-as-non-human-persons/

The declaration states (1):

1. Every individual cetacean has the right to life.
2. No cetacean should be held in captivity or servitude; be subject to cruel treatment; or be removed from their natural environment.
3. All cetaceans have the right to freedom of movement and residence within their natural environment.
4. No cetacean is the property of any State, corporation, human group or individual.
5. Cetaceans have the right to the protection of their natural environment.
6. Cetaceans have the right not to be subject to the disruption of their cultures.
7. The rights, freedoms and norms set forth in this Declaration should be protected under international and domestic law.

This is incredible in so many ways. This advancement has taken much longer than it should have, and hopefully it will open the flood gates for other nations to follow suit and to do so with other animals as well?

Thoughts?

Obviously it might present problems as well. For instance what if entire aquariums are shut down completely. Think of what that might do to certain areas of America.

Native Thinking.

So a lot of people think that the Native Americans had a religious view of nature and the land.
While this might only be the story passed down to us through the years, it is still an interesting idea!
When trying to imagine a greater power than themselves, they merely looked to the environment and stopped there. This seems like the safest assumption of all when it comes to a religious view. It is tangible. It's right there in front of you. You live within it, and without it you would be lost. So are other religions silly to be looking further for something bigger than just what lays around us?

Introduction

Hello there!
So it's been a while since I've been a philosophy class and I'm very excited! I picked it up as a minor, but the last few semesters I haven't seen any classes I've been interested in. But this one seems really interesting so I signed up.
I honestly don't know yet all that this class entails, but I'm excited to find out.

I'm hoping to gain a greater appreciation for the natural world around me and learn how to better coexist with and within it. I gained a huge appreciation for religions during World Religions, so hopefully this will be a similar experience.

Can't wait to meet all of you and get started.