By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Planned extinction: Is it ethical to deliberately wipe out a species?

 

Do you think it is?

Yes 69 56.56%
 
No 53 43.44%
 
Total:122
daredevil.shark on 09 May 2015
JazzB1987 said:

Dont kill them make them harmles(I mean we also dont kill stupid people so why kill mosquitos who are obviously smarter than dumb people?)

Make a mosquito bite just cause the tiny hole. Neither itching red bumb nor let them spread the deseases. (dunno how to do the last thing tho)

OR change their DNA so they HATE human scent and move on and go bite trees or whatever.


About the viruses etc? i dont care.

You never now what might happen.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 09 May 2015
Teeqoz said:
Eradicating viruses are something entirely different, and not even remotely comparable.

Guinea worm isn't virus, nor are mosquitoes.



curl-6 on 09 May 2015
Turkish said:
curl-6 said:

When you hear that a species is endangered, it's usually in the context that it should be saved before it's lost forever.

But what if the species in question is the Polio virus, or the Guinea Worm? Both are critically endangered thanks to decades of deliberate extermination efforts by humans. Both also happen to cause debilitating disease.

We've done it before; Smallpox and Rinderpest are extinct in the wild thanks to successful eradication campaigns.

And why draw the line there? In 2003, biologist Olivia Judson proposed that by wiping out 30 species of mosquito through the introduction of recessive "knockout" genes, we could save at least a million human lives annually that would otherwise be lost to malaria, dengue fever, and other mosquito-borne diseases.

So, do you believe that it's ethically right to intentionally eliminate a species from the earth?

Since when is a disease or virus a species? Its easy to talk about ethics when it doesn't affect you. But if you or your family was dying of malaria, you'd sing a different tune.

All bad and harmful things to humans should go extinct.

Uh, what are you talking about?

I never said  I was opposed to exterminating diseases. I'm not. I merely posed a question.



Lafiel on 09 May 2015
Turkish said:

Since when is a disease or virus a species? Its easy to talk about ethics when it doesn't affect you. But if you or your family was dying of malaria, you'd sing a different tune.

 

All bad and harmful things to humans should go extinct.

isn't the number 1 organism that causes humans to suffer and die other humans? does that mean you propose the extinction of mankind? ;)



JRPGfan on 09 May 2015

Im more worried about the "unplanned" ones that we cause :P



Around the Network
curl-6 on 09 May 2015
Angelus said:
I don't think anyone needs to concern themselves with the ethics of eradicating viruses

Okay, so what about mosquitoes? Or the Guinea Worm?



Lafiel on 09 May 2015
JRPGfan said:
Im more worried about the "unplanned" ones that we cause :P

yea, we have a tendency to "accidentally" kill off large mammals - and we are large mammals



Teeqoz on 09 May 2015
curl-6 said:
Teeqoz said:
Eradicating viruses are something entirely different, and not even remotely comparable.

Guinea worm isn't virus, nor are mosquitoes.


Mosquitoes aren't the source of the diseases, the actual diseases are. Thus the ethical solution in my head would be eradicating the diseases themselves, and I can't say I get any moral qualms from that. So no, we shouldn't eradicate 30 species of mosquitoes to stop malaria, we should eradicate malaria to stop malaria.

Is the guinea worm of any importance to any ecosystem? Does it fill any useful/neccesary role for nature?



curl-6 on 09 May 2015
Kynes said:
It's easy to think in the morals of eradicating species that don't affect you or people near you. Tell that to the families of the millions killed by those species.

You misunderstand. I am in favour of eradicating harmful pathogens. I was simply trying to pose the question in an open ended manner.



curl-6 on 09 May 2015
Teeqoz said:

Is the guinea worm of any importance to any ecosystem? Does it fill any useful/neccesary role for nature?

Guinea Worms are exclusively a parasite of humans; if they do not infect a person, they cannot reproduce, and they die out.

Since their eggs and larvae live in fresh water, it's probable they serve as a food source for small aquatic predators, though one would think such predators would be able to find plenty of other smaller organisms to feed on.

While every species interacts with its local ecosystem, I doubt the disappearance of a single species of parasitic worm is going to unravel the entire freshwater ecology of the few countries where it survives. 

Of course, I'm no expert.