>I don't
>have any problem with reconfiguring "the matter and energy of the
>world in any way we so desire", *except* that 'matter' and 'energy'
>are extremely simplistic ways of viewing the organic world. I
>certainly don't have answers for these concerns; but, I don't consider
>other 'conscious beings' to be *simply* units of matter and energy for
>my own consumption and entertainment.
Does anyone really, ...or doesn't everyone ?
Do you have plants in your house ? Are you not taking away their right to
have a chance to grow out in the open and reproduce, the chance to flourish
unlimited by the boundries of the little pot you keep them in ?
So what did you do to 'pay' back your computer today, for having it serve
your 'entertainment' and other purposes ? Or is a computer not 'conscious'
yet ? Or is it the fact that we have created it, which makes it OK.
Humanity is capable of both creation and helping other species reproduce.
With that comes responsability, i agree. But just like someone suggested we
should not project *ALL* Natural ethics to human society, we should not
project *only* human ethics on nature. Balancing the two is relevant on both
a personal and a social level.
Regarding only natural ethics it is *wrong* to use animals and plants for
ones entertainment, but it is perfectly ok to consume them. Regarding only
human ethics you would see the opposite.
Its up to the individual to work out to what side he or she makes that
balance heave a little...
joost de lyser
surreal@glo.be