I've just now been pondering on this question. we all day we don't take and we don't need and that the only reason we contribute to animals is because we either WANT to help them or feelt he NEED to help them or just love them. Is there any point in loving animals then saying we're not selfish as hell? What is the reason for animals besides them able to be of use for us if we ever had a need for food? OR warmth, or just the basic human needs. I'm thinking they're only for use because we only use them really just to take care of us emotionally so in a way we're all wasting our time. What if they're only good to use for our human needs?

It isn't selfish because just as we depend on them for emotional support, they depend on us. They love and cherish us as if we were their own family, and in a way we are.

We provide them with love, a warm bed, and food when they're hungry. They provide us with protection, a cute fuzzy face to cheer us up, and something almost childlike to play with.

Animals are practically people, in my opinion. They aren't as intelligent as us, but they still feel emotion. They have memories, and they have personalities. Loving an animal is like loving a member of your family. If you aren't talking about a pet, well... The preservation of life is still pretty important, no?

I suppose but I mean we only doit for emotional purposes really. we want to feel good to see an animal have a good home, we want to feel that we've actually done something to contribute to it's life. Overall, all animals belong in the wild even if they weren't bred that way or even would survive. We all live in a wildreness that doesn't really exist in the real 'wild.' but i'm saying, we just do everything for OUR own purposes, in reality, they don't even belong in our own universe. They belong in theirs, but we strip them away from it. That's my own opinion lol.

You're right, we did take them from their natural habitats and bring them into our worlds, but does that mean that we should just get rid of them and abandon them now? I've spoken with you over the phone, and over IRC enough times Kyouko to know that you more than likely wouldn't do that to an animal, because whenever I talk to you about throwing that motherfucking dog husky around who shits and pisses everywhere constantly, you die a little inside.

What I'm trying to say here, is that while we did indeed domesticate them, we now have to live with the fact that they have BECOME our own family, our own friends, etc, etc. We brought them down a knotch, and now they NEED us to guide them, and to help them along the way, just as a parent would do their baby-boy, or baby-girl. It's now our responsibility now to help them throughout their lives. Why? Because WE humans - OUR society has changed who they are, what they are. We took a pencil, flipped it upside down, erased part of who they are, and then began to add on our own little preferences, to suit our needs.

Yes, that in all truthfulness IS selfish, and when you think about it even more, it's also a massive moral leap. We made them that way through genetic engineering, and special breeding methods, in the same way that food was genetically engineered, and you probably have some sitting in your belly right now.

I don't necessarily think that every pet-owner or animal-lover needs to know this, but I sure as hell believe that it does hold some significant value.

Here's some food for thought though:

In a way, a dog is like your own inner-child manifesting itself into reality, to get you to come out and relive your old memories. Dogs bring happiness in a thousand different ways.

CriminalMinds wrote:[...]we're the only species that kills for enjoyment at the moment (though there might be a couple of ape species that have been proven to do this, I can't remember).

Urmm... Well, it's not killing, but ducks have been proven to rape others, particulary of their same gender and it's more common amongst males. (Note the use of the word rape, as homosexualism in animals is another can of worms.)

you're right you're right alucroas! I am just trying to view this in another persons point of view instead of my old loving cuddely self for animals. But if one actually thought about it, they are also tools to use for warm such as their skins and weapons, their teeth and bones, and even their.....meat. I don't know, I think the Native American in me is speaking. lol. What I think of an animal that should really be studied is the Fish. The fish is what we should really study instead of kill to eat or for game. The fish lead to awesome discoveries too. Maybe this all sounds silly, giving Fish any gratitude or respect but Fish basically are gods of the waters.

The fish lead to awesome discoveries too. Maybe this all sounds silly, giving Fish any gratitude or respect but Fish basically are gods of the waters.

Indeed!

Gratitude and respect, most certainly... the fish keep us alive... just as does everything else on this planet, and far from it, in space and in time...

Overall, all animals belong in the wild even if they weren't bred that way or even would survive. We all live in a wildreness that doesn't really exist in the real 'wild.' but i'm saying, we just do everything for OUR own purposes, in reality, they don't even belong in our own universe. They belong in theirs, but we strip them away from it.

Those are some very interesting views, which are I think a not uncommon (side-?)effect of urban living and the comparatively recent dissociation of our cultures and societies from the ancient rhythms of nature -- though I don't presume to know where you live, and this is not even a personal 'rebuttal', just a comment.

It's funny, and I don't mean to nitpick or anything like that at all-- they ways you've referred to the wild and to wilderness. The "real 'wild'" you've put in quotations, while this (urban? metaphysical? emotional?) wilderness is given full fledged word-status. It's interesting, I don't know what else to say about it. I think there is a cross-over and that the land on which we live isn't tamed, as it seems, by the thin layer of concrete we've lain between earth and sky. I believe that though it seems we are independent of animals and self-sufficient, even to the point of not knowing quite where our food is coming from, so assured are we that we will get some to eat-- well, it isn't so.

What if they're only good to use for our human needs?

What indeed!?
Sorry, but what other kind of needs have we? Well actually I can answer my own question, I think there is a lot about our being and our spirit which couldn't be classified as human, or attributed boundaries like that...

But perhaps you're implying that animals do no benefit to anything but humans, in which case I would simply point out the vast interconnectedness of energy and love which promotes the existence of anything at all, which surely we must value beyond the selfish and greedy limitations of our own human existence...?

One would hope. However, we are told again and again through popular culture and by the sheer competitiveness of the world that the highest and best and even the <i>only aim there is</i>-- is reaching the point of highest esteem, highest income, highest gratuitous enjoyment of life that is possible, for each of us, individually. And I think that this desire and this message causes a lot of mediocrity on the part of us all as a group, as a community, as nations and as a whole world full of people... that we are unable to co-operate for fear of losing some glory, some land, some money... The heights which can be reached when co-operating are so much greater than those which are executed in solitude alone, and inter-species, even inter-dimensional (if indeed animals belong in a different universe than this one... which is very interesting too) co-operation is so much the better.

Love,
kara

I don't really think EVERYONE needs animals or pets around, but there are several complications with how the concept is today.

People use pets to gain a friend in a time of need and loneliness, using them to release emotions and stress in a worry-free environment such as their home or room whilst alone.

But if anyone around were to throw animals out, or if humanity as a whole aimed towards placing animals back into natural habitats as they were once long ago, the animals would probably fight, or be confused on how to live and survive without the superficial aid from human beings; who are often feeding them or cleaning up after them or supplying them with a comfortable home to live in and a bed to have a sense of security in.

People also use pets, need pets, in order for any form of friendship, even if the friends mind is less developed than the humans.

I think that animals were brought into the world to show us love, and by giving us their love, we learn to give them love back in return. I'm not saying all animals, but with pets, this is what my heart tells me. So love it, hate it, whatever, this is my view on animals. (Huge animal lover!)

I just know that Rover lets me get in some swell target practice so I can get better at deer hunting. I'm up to Rover XXVI. A costly training program, but not without its benefits.

Well, technically, we forced pets to "love" us. If it were entirely up to them, we'd be the prey; but unfortunately, we're tougher, we're smarter, and we've got guns. Domestic animals began when we needed help: in farming, in guarding, etc.

They are nothing like humans; they do not have the same emotions, they do not work the same, their brains are entirely different. I'm wholeheartedly against animal cruelty and all - I find animals fascinating, but to agree that they're here to love us... well, nope, I just remember that they were put into that situation against their will. They've learned not to love us, but to depend on us; it's the only way they'll survive, because they won't have a single hope of survival out in the wild. Not anymore.

Many of the things they do are not based on emotions, but on instinct. It's why you can never be too careful with a dog, or any domestic animals.

I don't think there need to be a REASON to love an animal anymore than there need to be a reason for loving a human. They're like babies, but furrier. (Animals 1, Babies 0) They are beings with minds and emotions, after all, even though they are not as sophisticated as us.

What if they're only good to use for our human needs?

You can really say the same thing about interacting with other humans. We don't have kids or help others with no selfishness at all. It's because we are emotionally fulfilled by it. And that does not negate the sincerity of the action.

they are fun to look at and they die so soon why want one anyway for you to get too attached to if and be an emotional reak when it dies, plian and short