Ouch... :sad:

That movie, Antz, was sort of chilling to watch when I was a kid. Especially the part where the kid was trying to crush the ants. I remember being quite stricken by the fact that at least in the movie they were sentient... they were basically people. — KarpalTunnel

Do you mean to say that ants perceive me as a faceless Cthulu-like titan? Cool. :grin:

More serious response: I saw that movie too. I don't think the ants comprehend what I'm doing to them like the kid in the film, but it's definitely fun imagining myself like that. Thanks.

and without your manufactured, malodorous footwear. — KarpalTunnel

...hey! You can blame the material for being spongy and porous. And what can I say: I'm an active guy. You say that like I should be bothered... but the more my running shoes smell, the manlier it makes me feel. :grin:




More serious response again: Knuckle dragging? Most people think I'm a pretty good guy, not some chest-beating bully. I even coach peewee tennis for free. And there's no sadism involved. For that to be true, the ants would have to experience suffering, which they are incapable of. Really surprised you think me stepping on ants is worse than people who shoot rare mountain goats, elephants, and endangered cats, like the adult children of Donald Trump do.

From Google
Jains believe that life (which equals soul) is sacred regardless of faith, caste, race, or even species. Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture or kill any creature or living being.

I guess I admire this philosophy although I do not live it. The needless taking of life does seem to be undesirable. I like many others probably look at the level of imputed sentience or ability to suffer when judging such acts.

Here's an alternative point of view if anyone's interested.

I won't say I had a normal childhood, I definitely did not but given my experience of humanity's moral dimension - the small kid's section that I have some idea of - there are three kinds of immoral acts that are a big no-no and they are:

1. Murder
2. Lying
3. Theft

These three sins if I may call it that for convenience and not for religious reasons implies that we humans hold three things as of incalculable value (laying it on thick):

1. Life
2. Truth
3. Personal property

Crushing a bug amounts to killing it and that, if you do it to another person, is murder. Much of what has been discussed should revolve around the difference between bugs and humans.

The objective?

To demonstrate, if possible, that stomping on a bug isn't the same as dropping an intermodal container on a person below. However, that would mean life isn't the main issue (bugs can be killed) or, in other words, there are "things" more important than life. Life, in and of itself, its destruction, is not what murder is about!

Murder is taking the life of another person i.e. Murder is ending the life of x and x is a human.

Spraying a bug with poison is ending the life of x and x is not human.

I suspect that those who dislike people who crush bugs to death have the good sense to realize that bug-killing is just too close for comfort to condone - one condition for becoming a murderer is met (don't care about life; that's why bugs are killable). The day a person who kills bugs comes to know there really is no difference between insects and humans will be celebrated mourned as the birthday of a serial killer, a genocidal maniac, a mass-murderer, a homicidal maniac. Too dramatic? Sorry! I just couldn't help it!

May God have mercy on our souls! :chin:

I think you may be right. Even though it's an illogical leap though to see killing bugs as one step away from (or closer to) killing humans.

Plenty of people have less reservation about killing simpler beings relative to more complex beings, and don't "move on from the former to the latter". But I think some grasp for a rationalization to explain why killing even simpler beings bothers them - especially along with the notion that any pleasure might come of it.

In a game, you don't kill anyone or anything just because the appearance might give that impression, you simply "win". The sensation is that of victory/superiority, just the same as when winning any game against someone else. The form of the game is irrelevant. Killing bugs for some is much the same - it's a solution to a problem. But just because some prefer a method that involves death, it doesn't mean death is all the same or might become the same for them.

Não li seu texto inteiro, mas acho que se eu estivesse em uma situação onde vários insetos invadissem minha casa eu provavelmente iria morar na rua invés de chamar a detenção.

Não li seu texto inteiro, mas acho que se eu estivesse em uma situação onde vários insetos invadissem minha casa eu provavelmente iria morar na rua invés de chamar a detenção.

Using google translate, portugese: "I haven't read your entire text, but I think if I were in a situation where several insects invaded my house I would probably live on the street instead of that prison." — TheMadFool

That is a greatly irrational solution to a small problem that can easily be solved with a foot.

That is a greatly irrational solution to a small problem that can easily be solved with a foot — IanBlain

That solution extends naturally to killing people who are, let's just say, problematic for you. Don't you agree? After all, in both cases we sanction killing or, more accurately, it's ok to off something/someone to deal with a problem.

Too, ecologically speaking, bugs are considered as essential components of the natural order, key to the health of the ecosystem - exterminating them, your foot in chemical and other forms, might come back to bite us.

Moreover, did you notice?, bug sprays are labelled, "POISON" - what kills them kills us too. I wonder what that means?

We are family...

Jains believe that life (which equals soul) is sacred regardless of faith, caste, race, or even species. Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture or kill any creature or living being.

I guess I admire this philosophy although I do not live it. The needless taking of life does seem to be undesirable. I like many others probably look at the level of imputed sentience or ability to suffer when judging such acts. — prothero

They apparently live in India and I'm certain I'd be unwelcome among them. Still, I wonder about their philosophy's applications. Those guys use brooms to sweep away insects in their path. It's one thing for them to be uncomfortable with injuring or killing any living being, but I wonder what (if any) intervention they prescribe when witnessing someone else doing it. Do they intervene to stop violence or do they stop at simply observing it with frowns on their faces?

That solution extends naturally to killing people who are, let's just say, problematic for you. Don't you agree? After all, in both cases we sanction killing or, more accurately, it's ok to off something/someone to deal with a problem — TheMadFool

Hmm, but on the other hand: I have the wherewithal to recognize that much greater consideration must go into the killing of humans. There is greater loss and greater consequence. Bugs on the other hand live in a world far below me -- one of sand and grass and warring insect species, and in which every minute is battle for survival. When you already live in a world fraught with peril, where being eaten, dismembered, cocooned, drowned, dehydrated, swatted, or squashed could be a minute away, what's my shoe but another random deadly threat?

Too, ecologically speaking, bugs are considered as essential components of the natural order, key to the health of the ecosystem - exterminating them, yourfoot in chemical and other forms, might come back to bite us. — TheMadFool

You have a good point. The mass extermination of bugs as well as damaging the ecosystem would absolutely bite us. But being one guy, my foot alone (in any other form too) isn't capable of influencing the ecosystem on such a scale, no matter how many anthills I demolish personally. My "carbon footprint" and general impact on the environment overall, as result of other behavior, is a lot bigger than the literal footprints left when I purposely step on the ants in my driveway.

...

Do you dislike seeing someone step on bugs? Do you see it as worse than recreational fishing? — bert1

I'm interested in both and the reasoning behind each. Mostly the first.. and how and why it influences your opinion of the someone in question.

That solution extends naturally to killing people who are, let's just say, problematic for you. Don't you agree? After all, in both cases we sanction killing or, more accurately, it's ok to off something/someone to deal with a problem. — TheMadFool

I don't agree. Even a fly should be left alone except when they bite you. To use toxic spray is viscious and cowardly. It's a mean use of the intelligence we have. How mean can it get. Examining poisonous structures based in science on subject test flies in scientific labs is a silent testimony of western sciientific elite positioning itself far away from Nature. The flies scream in vain. Aowa! Bitten by a fly! Smashed them with my hand. Unluckily they bit my scrotum...

Do I dislike it when people purposely step on bugs? My answer is "that depends on the bug". My opinion regarding this is based upon a principle: that we should focus on encouraging the diversity of life, the diversity of species, rather than life itself, life for it's own sake. Of course, others, famously such as Albert Schweitzer, would have disagreed with me, citing a need to reverence life itself, but I can live with their disagreement. If a species is common and unthreatened, such as the common black ant, then go on, boy, step away, especially if the bug threatens destructiveness.. If, however, the "bug" in question is of a threatened or rarer species, such as a praying mantis or, increasingly, the European honey bee, then one should try to preserve the life.

Now, please don't ask me how this rationale extends to the species homo sapiens, which presently so grossly overpopulates the earth...

Well first of all, bugs experience pain. You might only half hurt them, and then they could be doomed to walk around for some time with chronic pain and then die.

It seems like OP is amazed more so at the influential idea that humans are not superior to all other species. Why should this idea amaze you? We're not superior to any other species. If you look systematically at all the wonders of what other species are able to achieve this should be obvious to you. Let David Attenborough's voice guide you through the amazing lives of other species in one of his documentaries. There is nobility in other species. There is spirituality. There is culture, even civilization (such as in the case of some ants), to admire.

So why is one action tolerated but not the other? Use this thread to discuss respectfully: Do you dislike seeing someone step on bugs? Do you see it as worse than recreational fishing? — IanBlain

It doesn't generally bother me. Maybe if someone seemed to enjoy stomping the life out of the unfortunate creature in an especially inhumane way, I might find the attitude and the performance at least slightly repugnant.

I'm inclined to say that recreational fishing is worse than recreational bug stomping. That's because I'm inclined to say the fish is more likely than the bug to count as a sentient being, or that the fish seems likely to be "more sentient" than the bug... or something along these lines.

It seems worse to torture a cow than to quickly stomp the life out of an ant. It seems worse to speak to another human being in an abusive way -- to be preemptively insulting and arrogant, for example -- than to stomp on a bug just for kicks.

That's just my inclination. If it turns out that somehow bugs and fish and mammals are all "equally sentient"... I suppose I'd have to reconsider.

I'm genuinely interested why a small number of people feel they should protest. — IanBlain

It's a fairly small minority in my circles too. Some of these conscientious objectors have been influenced by cultural trends associated with Buddhist and Jainist traditions. I suppose in some Buddhist communities, at least some communities of Buddhist monks, the attitude you've isolated is the norm, not the exception.

I think it's an admirable practice to take reasonable measures to avoid killing insects. I'm not sure it's admirable to admonish others for failing to adopt the same attitude. I'm pretty sure it's not admirable to freak out about it or to give it disproportionate attention.

Well first of all, bugs experience pain. You might only half hurt them, and then they could be doomed to walk around for some time with chronic pain and then die. — Tanner Lloyd

Pain as in suffering, or pain as in chemical response to harmful stimulus? :brow: I'm not closed off to the idea of bugs experiencing pain, but it doesn't seem likely. And even if they experienced "chronic pain" as a result of being half crushed, they're just bugs. They exist in a world far below me, their problems not even being on my radar. As I said, what is my sneaker except one of many other deadly threats they face each minute?

It seems like OP is amazed more so at the influential idea that humans are not superior to all other species. Why should this idea amaze you? We're not superior to any other species. If you look systematically at all the wonders of what other species are able to achieve this should be obvious to you. Let David Attenborough's voice guide you through the amazing lives of other species in one of his documentaries. There is nobility in other species. There is spirituality. There is culture, even civilization (such as in the case of some ants), to admire. — Tanner Lloyd

Superior is an arbitrary term and I don't really see it in those terms. However, why shouldn't I look down on ants? I'm literally a giant compared to them.

Also you mischaracterize my lack of appreciation. Even when I step on them, it is interesting to watch their reactions in response to different situations. I'm still amazed at what they are capable of collectively.

If it's ok to step on and snuff out bugs, is it ok if giants step on and snuff us (humans) out?

That is a rather cruel logic, don't you think? Animals never hurt a person unless they feel threatened. Humanism, the philosophical idea that homo sapiens are the only species worth living and every other species is prey is an absurd concept.
What makes human beings the sole authority on pain? Animals feel pain just as much as we do and yet we don't value that.
Lobsters are boiled alive, the skin and organs of fishes are bring torn apart, pigs are terribly abused and slaughtered as they watch their friends go through the same in terror, all for what? So that human beings could hone their cuisine roulette, have fun and enjoy a big Mac.
When considered thoroughly, Thanos wasn't particularly wrong.
Animals kill each other only when necessary and to survive, they do it without any further emotions regarding betrayal, happiness, partiality, pride or sadism.
Human beings are the plight of the world, they inflict pain not only on themselves but also on innocent animals that cannot possibly fight back.

If it's ok to step on and snuff out bugs, is it ok if giants step on and snuff us (humans) out? — TheMadFool

If there were giants aliens who discovered Earth and started stepping on us for no reason -- much the same way I do ants -- then I wouldn't be in much of a position to complain, given what I stated. I do see your point. :razz:

In that same vein though, If the positions were reversed, and I encountered a race of tiny, intelligent aliens, I have to admit that I would be very inclined to take advantage of the size difference just as they would. The idea of having entire race of intelligent beings to either toy with, reward, or terrorize as a focus for my frustrations or whims is pretty tantalizing. It would be like playing god, but almost for real. And despite its moral quandaries, I could very much see myself being an old testament God and enjoying every second of it. And be honest: what guy hasn't fantasized about being a god every now and then? That seems a normal expression of the male ego, possibly one element to the mindset of most successful conquerors throughout history. Being an absolute tyrant is rewarding.

What makes human beings the sole authority on pain? Animals feel pain just as much as we do and yet we don't value that. — TheSoundConspirator

Can you substantiate that though?

Animals kill each other only when necessary and to survive, they do it without any further emotions regarding betrayal, happiness, partiality, pride or sadism. — TheSoundConspirator

It is not true that animals kill only when necessary for survival.

Moreover, did you notice?, bug sprays are labelled, "POISON" - what kills them kills us too. I wonder what that means? — TheMadFool

It's an interesting allegorical comparison... but my suspicion is they just meant toxic if ingested, inhaled, or exposed to skin. :razz:

I've been pondering something. Firstly, I'm the kind of guy who steps on bugs, not around them. If there's a bug in my house; I don't "rescue it." I squash it, then flush it. Just want to be upfront about that. — IanBlain

I don't purposely kill bugs. I'd rather take them out of the house. Especially spiders. I can catch it with my hands (cup my hands) and take it outside. I haven't killed a spider in my life -- at least not knowingly. Same with any other bugs -- cockroach (it's a mixed feeling, I don't like to be near them). Also, garden snails - I could never hurt them. I couldn't care less about the plants in the garden if they're happy eating and reproducing. (Oh, we're talking about bugs, okay). Anyway, the exception is the flies. I could be patient and let it out through the door, or not, and get the fly swatter. But it's the only bug that I would purposely kill, sometimes.

I don't disapprove of your practice, although I don't practice it. When you see someone who pretty habitually squashes them, even going out of the way to do so, does it give you a different idea about them than you otherwise would have? Some do.. which I find interesting.

When you see someone who pretty habitually squashes them, even going out of the way to do so, does it give you a different idea about them than you otherwise would have? — IanBlain

Yes, it does. Because I find it unnecessary most of the time. So, my thought process is, the act of squishing must be a reaction to something more serious than bugs. Something about the personality of the person. It's just me. I don't really know why people squish bugs unnecessarily. I also don't shoo wild animals if I find them in the yard, like fox or racoon eating from the cat's food bowl. I let them be.

And oh yeah. The bees. I don't avoid bees -- they don't bother me. They stay away from me. lol. The ex BF, though, has phobia of bees. So, I'd be like cool when I hear bees buzzing in the bushes, and it would be like a kryptonite for him.

It's definitely unnecessary, no question. You say it gives you a different idea about the person: the act being a reaction to something more serious is possible, but what about just indulging one's self for its own sake?

But isn't indulging one's self by killing bugs something to think about? There are a million other ways to indulge one's self. Do you know that people use a nutcracker or some other object to crack a nut just to see how well they could crack it? No joke.

True there are other ways. But toying with nuts and other inanimate objects is less interesting and interactive than toying with ants. All are "unnecessary" though: I don't think many would argue against that.

Yes, to answer that, we need to answer the question, what is pain?
Pain is essentially a response your brain generates when the neurons in a particular region of your body get stimulated. Complex species belonging to the kingdom Animalia have neuronal connections throughout their body. Now, in slaughterhouses, pigs are abused,tortured with cattle prods, kicked to the curb, and are made to go through unbearable psychological trauma. As they lay in wait to be killed, they see their peers and children get shot in front of them and that is not only immense physiological trauma but also psychological.
How do we know these (apart from the scream and agony of the animals)? We can see it with fMRI and multiple studies show that cows, pigs, chickens, goats, and sheep are animals that are very intelligent and feel emotional and physical pain as much as we do.
And what do we do about these? We breed them featherless with 6 legs so that we can enjoy a meal from KFC.
Despite awareness of torture in slaughterhouses, no laws are passed to rectify it and everyone who claims to be compassionate still eats the meat with no second thought.
Now, to answer your second question, animals kill for survival and to assert dominance, yes. But they do not industrialize it and keep killing more than 200 Million animals every single day just to hone their cultural roulette. Human beings have alternate methods of survival and food sources, ones that do not require slaughter and still give as much or more nutrition than meat, and yet we continue obliterating the lives of millions of animals every day.

"Less interesting and interactive than toying with ants"
Adolf Hitler was better than this, @IanBlain. At least he truly believed that the Aryan race was the purest and that jews were a hindrance to human development. He did not kill them and torture them out of "interactive and interesting" pleasure.
Ants form complex social colonies and show spectacular signs of intelligence. They feel pain as well, physical irritation as they are being squished. But we won't consider that, would we? Because we believe we are "superior species" when in fact, from what I can infer, we are inferior toevery other species. We kill, torture,breed, poke and prod other species, all so we can do what? Derive pleasure and enhance our causes.
Is it justifiable to kill and cruelly torture other species to gain momentary pleasure and enhance our "educational standards"? Frankly speaking, I'd go as far as to conclude that Mussolini and Hitler's agendas were purer than yours.

Human beings have alternate methods of survival and food sources, ones that do not require slaughter and still give as much or more nutrition than meat, and yet we continue obliterating the lives of millions of animals every day. — TheSoundConspirator

While I certainly hate hijacking a thread with a topic all on its own -- this is squishing bugs thread, not eating meat (and why is Hitler being used here? -- bugs, Hitler, meat. What a combination) -- I just want to say there are now plant-based "meats" sold in supermarkets. There have always been vegan meat around. But now they are common in stores.

If there were giants aliens who discovered Earth and started stepping on us for no reason -- much the same way I do ants -- then I wouldn't be in much of a position to complain, given what I stated. I do see your point. :razz:

In that same vein though, If the positions were reversed, and I encountered a race of tiny, intelligent aliens, I have to admit that I would be very inclined to take advantage of the size difference just as they would. The idea of having entire race of intelligent beings to either toy with, reward, or terrorize as a focus for my frustrations or whims is pretty tantalizing. It would be like playing god, but almost for real. And despite its moral quandaries, I could very much see myself being an old testament God and enjoying every second of it. And be honest: what guy hasn't fantasized about being a god every now and then? That seems a normal expression of the male ego, possibly one element to the mindset of most successful conquerors throughout history. Being an absolute tyrant is rewarding — IanBlain

Exactly. I think the Golden Rule - do unto others as you would like others to do unto you - or it's negative formulation - do not do unto others what you wouldn't want others to do unto you - is key/germane to the morality of bug squishing.

The reason why we don't apply the Golden rule to bug stomping is because they seem incapable of using the tit-for-tat strategy that has a major role vis-à-vis the golden rule but the winds of change do blow and with odd results :point: Agent Kay Squishing Bugs In MIB