|
|
#47
07-01-2010, 01:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I think Avatar is a story of extremes. You see Jake as a human and hear of all the bad things that have happened on Earth and through the RDA you see the extremes of negative human behaviours such as greed with only a few humans showing the positives such as compassion. Jakes brother was murdered by a mugger and the part where Jake fights in the bar that wasn't in the film also show negative things you do not want to experience. Jake then learns the Na'vi ways and you mostly see the positives and tender moments, such as the burial scene and the whole Na'vi society showing attractive ways to live in comparison to all the negatives you are shown on the human side. This reinforces Jakes decision and also him falling for Neytiri seals his fate.
Avatar is too black and white in ways, since situations are not as straight forward as his in real life. Loyalty to ones species all depends on the situation, though I do agree that humans are innately social and will strive to help protect human life. I would say I would do the same in Jakes position as in a way it was obvious that this is what he should do. But like I said before, all the positives and negatives of his situation were played in a way where the moral choice would be to join the Na'vi and stop a repeat of the same negatives occuring on another world. Being part of the Na'vi would not mean being hostile to humans, hence why some of the scientists stay behind. In a real life situation you will be loyal to your species because that is who you are and even if there are bad parts of humanity, there is also the good and this should never be forgotten. Though to hold resentment to ALL humanity because a majority are ruining things for everyone else isn't a good enough reason to be disloyal to humanity.
__________________
 Eventually after centuries of war they gave up fighting and assimilated the enemy and found the enemy was themselves. We are all seeds of the great tree, whose strength is in our legs, like the mighty trunks. In our arms, as sheltering branches. In our eyes, the blue-flower, which unfolds to the sun. We are all seeds of the great tree, whose song is within us. 
|
|
#48
07-01-2010, 01:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Which brings us back to species loyalty imo... To me, a human being is far more valuable asset to humanity than an insect. Now, perhaps the insect itself is special in some way to humanity, but that's a rare occurrence. Even if it is and we don't know it, I don't know that, and it wouldn't factor into my decision. Going back on topic... Everybody needs support. If nobody in a group or species is willing to do that, they whole group will suffer. We help our own to achieve whatever it is that they're shooting for, assuming that such achievements are going to benefit the species in the long run. Either through the acquisition of knowledge or the invention of new technologies, its all going to benefit humanity, and thus the individual to some degree. Now if your unhappy with your species, like I said, changing fine. However, you're probably not going to be welcome among your former compatriots if you do that. So be damned sure its what you want. Because there is literally no going back if you decide to throw your support behind a competing group.(which any species is going to be on some level)
__________________
:psyduck: Last edited by Isard; 07-01-2010 at 01:34 PM.
|
|
#49
07-01-2010, 01:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
All other animals on Earth has done FAR more good than we humans have. We cannot POSSIBLY tell if those animals have feelings and sentience or not. We humans have changed through our generations. We have gone from being a part of nature, to studying it and looking at it from an outside perspective. Does this makes us more worth? Does our ability to look down at other species makes us more worth? Our ability to destroy Earth? I say no.
__________________
|
|
#50
07-01-2010, 03:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Why I would save the human.
My instincts tend to save my equals, not different species. And although it would be equally valid to save the bug, a whale or bacteria; we always tend to care for what is similar to us, this is, other humans. It's actually a matter of empathy. Some feel none at all (apathy), some feel empathy for everything; but most of human beings will feel empathy for other human beings.
__________________
I love Plato, but I love Truth more - Aristotle
Last edited by ZenitYerkes; 07-01-2010 at 03:59 PM.
|
|
#51
07-01-2010, 04:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What makes saving an insect over a human right? What makes a praying mantis eating her mate right after mating with him? What makes a wolf eating a cow right? Explain to me why they are allowed to determine what gets to live and what gets to die and we do not?
If you say it is their nature, then it is human nature to be social and to help others, you just do so over the internet (like me) instead of in person. It would be human nature to help the fellow human up off the cliff face and save his life. Would you try and stop the wolf from eating meat and turn him into a vegetarian?
|
|
#52
07-01-2010, 04:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
I love Plato, but I love Truth more - Aristotle
|
|
#53
07-01-2010, 06:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In which case we are allowed to choose the human over the beetle because we are instinctively hardwired to do so. It is part of our survival mechanism. That makes it ok for us to choose to save the human and not the beetle by that logic.
|
|
#54
07-01-2010, 06:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I would save them, not because they are human, but because they are sentient. If it was another sentient being instead of a human, I'd save them. If it was a nonsentient animal that still is known to feel emotion, have relationships with each other, then they would not be a priority over a sentient being, but would be over an insect.
__________________
...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
