Save the endangered species? Or save the humans?

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

05/15/2013 04:33:31 PM · #1

Gedankenexperiment:

Imagine that you are king of a small country in South America. It comes to your attention that there's a small tribe of hunters who are using hunting practices that will, within ten years, destroy no less than ten endangered species, perhaps more - rendering them extinct.

This particular tribe is war-like, and refuses outside contact aggressively - the last two attempts have been tragically unsuccessful.

It has become clear that in order to prevent the extinction of a series of animals, you would have no other choice than to destroy this small tribe.

Which has the greater value? A group of humans, not dissimilar from the rest of us in genetic terms, but culturally unique? Or the group of endangered animals which are genetically unique, and in some cases may even be sole representatives of a branch of evolution.

Note that it's important to remember that the loss of these ten animals will likely cause a radical restructuring of the food web in the local or extended local environment, possibly cascading to dozens more extinction events within a century.

What is your decision, who lives, and who dies? Do you choose action, and murder a tribe of people, or do you choose inaction and allow a series of extinctions to occur? What is the right choice?

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

05/15/2013 04:44:26 PM · #2

The right choice is no choice. The undeveloped humans are a part of the ecological system. Extinction is a natural part of the evolution of ecosystems.
The experiment assumes that the developed human community has a right, even a responsibility to manage the relationship of the undeveloped tribe with its environment. This is not a valid assumption.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/15/2013 04:50:35 PM · #3

We're on the same wavelength, Fritz. And I might even suggest, in my best Swiftian mode, a modest solution: let us create ethnographic reserves for tribes such as this one, stocked with a better form of protein, such as, say, water buffalo? Charge tourists to visit the anachronism, and it's a win-win for the animals, the "host country", and the tourists. Granted, it's not much of a win for the anachrons themselves, but it's better than disappearing off the face of the earth as you're absorbed, right?

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

05/15/2013 04:56:41 PM · #4

Originally posted by kirbic:

\

this.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

05/15/2013 05:18:23 PM · #5

Originally posted by Cory:

Note that it's important to remember that the loss of these ten animals will likely cause a radical restructuring of the food web in the local or extended local environment, possibly cascading to dozens more extinction events within a century.

This is unlikely to be realistic. The radical restructuring doesn't just commence when the last critter is killed. It commences as the populations decrease. If they are already endangered, and that term reflects a real shortage, the restructuring has likely already largely taken place.

Message edited by author 2013-05-15 17:19:12.

05/15/2013 05:21:11 PM · #6

Carpet bomb or nuke the whole area. Kill the tribe and the animals....Get drunk and celebrate the destruction. Then build a resort complex to showcase the beautiful baren landscape..

What the hell type of question is that

05/15/2013 05:26:17 PM · #7

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

ROFL!

05/15/2013 05:27:44 PM · #8

Originally posted by kirbic:

I agree in principal.

But, then, wouldn't we still be able to argue that killing off the tribe simply accounts for a part of 'natural evolution'? I suppose the argument there becomes "are we (developed humans, whatever that means) still a part of the ecological system?"....

05/15/2013 05:28:41 PM · #9

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Good idea, but historically such moves have proved almost invariably tragic.

05/15/2013 05:29:49 PM · #10

what type of animals...are spiders considered on your animal list...If so I stand by my last statement

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

05/15/2013 05:41:10 PM · #11

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

what type of animals...are spiders considered on your animal list...If so I stand by my last statement

Cute little furry ones with hugely oversized eyeballs.

pamb

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

05/15/2013 05:45:13 PM · #12

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:
what type of animals...are spiders considered on your animal list...If so I stand by my last statement

Cute little furry ones with hugely oversized eyeballs.

Well then, don't blow those ones up.

05/15/2013 05:50:12 PM · #13

we must have total annialation...Then when we tell the next tribe not to hunt certain animals...........they'll listen

05/15/2013 05:51:36 PM · #14

Originally posted by pamb:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:
what type of animals...are spiders considered on your animal list...If so I stand by my last statement

Cute little furry ones with hugely oversized eyeballs.

Well then, don't blow those ones up.

Did I mention that they make adorable noises?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

05/15/2013 05:52:14 PM · #15

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by pamb:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:
what type of animals...are spiders considered on your animal list...If so I stand by my last statement

Cute little furry ones with hugely oversized eyeballs.

Well then, don't blow those ones up.

Did I mention that they make adorable noises?

So, I take it that you're for exterminating the tribe to save the endangered furrballs?

pamb

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

05/15/2013 06:00:55 PM · #16

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by pamb:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:
what type of animals...are spiders considered on your animal list...If so I stand by my last statement

Cute little furry ones with hugely oversized eyeballs.

Well then, don't blow those ones up.

Did I mention that they make adorable noises?

So, I take it that you're for exterminating the tribe to save the endangered furrballs?

I believe I would attempt to retrieve samples of the threatened species, establish environments elsewhere where they can potentially flourish, then leave the tribe to themselves. Monitor the area. Rinse and repeat as required. But I haven't thought this through, either, so I'm prepared to be blasted for this opinion...

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/15/2013 06:07:53 PM · #17

blasting the little buggers whould also be acceptable

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/15/2013 07:15:10 PM · #18

If all problems presented only two possible solutions then we humans would probably be exinct already.

A "thought experiment" with such limited and arbitrary restrictions is almost completely meaningless.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/15/2013 07:30:40 PM · #19

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Ahh! Good.

I'd like to hear your proposed alternatives that were missed.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/15/2013 07:58:07 PM · #20

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
If all problems presented only two possible solutions then we humans would probably be exinct already.

A "thought experiment" with such limited and arbitrary restrictions is almost completely meaningless.

Ahh! Good.

I'd like to hear your proposed alternatives that were missed.

Cowboy and Bear already did so several posts back ... I was just pointing out that the two alternatives you offered were a false dichotomy and therefore not that "useful" ...

I once took a workshop on creative problem-solving, which focused on the concept of true brain-storming and the importance of "deferred judgment." To illustrate, they presented us with the "Five-minute problem."

At the very beginning, we were put in groups of five or six people and given a problem, and instructed to write down as many possible solutions as we could think up in five minutes -- my group was average with about fifteen ideas for solving the problem.

At the end of the workshop, where we learned (among other things) to present ideas without judging or discussing them, we repeated the exercise with a similar problem, and again my group was average with about 120 possible solutions. The workshop leader pointed at the two sets of lists, and asked which type of list was more likely to contain at least one really practical solution, the one with 15 ideas or the one with over 100 ...

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/15/2013 08:33:47 PM · #21

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
If all problems presented only two possible solutions then we humans would probably be exinct already.

A "thought experiment" with such limited and arbitrary restrictions is almost completely meaningless.

Ahh! Good.

I'd like to hear your proposed alternatives that were missed.

Cowboy and Bear already did so several posts back ... I was just pointing out that the two alternatives you offered were a false dichotomy and therefore not that "useful" ...

I once took a workshop on creative problem-solving, which focused on the concept of true brain-storming and the importance of "deferred judgment." To illustrate, they presented us with the "Five-minute problem."

At the very beginning, we were put in groups of five or six people and given a problem, and instructed to write down as many possible solutions as we could think up in five minutes -- my group was average with about fifteen ideas for solving the problem.

At the end of the workshop, where we learned (among other things) to present ideas without judging or discussing them, we repeated the exercise with a similar problem, and again my group was average with about 120 possible solutions. The workshop leader pointed at the two sets of lists, and asked which type of list was more likely to contain at least one really practical solution, the one with 15 ideas or the one with over 100 ...

Well.

Let's see about this. Bear's suggestion was to do a forced relocation, which were quite popular in the 1800's around here. Probably not a good idea though. Cowboy's suggestion was to nuke the whole lot. Also probably not practical.

I disagree with the premise that the list of 100 ideas is better, for the simple fact that each of those 100 now require extensive discussion - and I think that often, your first response is the correct response. The only real difference is that you're now splitting it up into two activities instead of one, and pointing at a bunch of half-done jobs and proclaiming "Look how good this is!!" Nah, give me two or three really well thought out ideas, far more valuable than 1000 half-thought out precursors to ideas.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/15/2013 08:45:39 PM · #22

Originally posted by Cory:

I disagree with the premise that the list of 100 ideas is better, for the simple fact that each of those 100 now require extensive discussion - and I think that often, your first response is the correct response. The only real difference is that you're now splitting it up into two activities instead of one, and pointing at a bunch of half-done jobs and proclaiming "Look how good this is!!" Nah, give me two or three really well thought out ideas, far more valuable than 1000 half-thought out precursors to ideas.

Both research and experience have shown your position to be incorrect, in all kinds of sitations.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/15/2013 09:12:43 PM · #23

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Cory:
I disagree with the premise that the list of 100 ideas is better, for the simple fact that each of those 100 now require extensive discussion - and I think that often, your first response is the correct response. The only real difference is that you're now splitting it up into two activities instead of one, and pointing at a bunch of half-done jobs and proclaiming "Look how good this is!!" Nah, give me two or three really well thought out ideas, far more valuable than 1000 half-thought out precursors to ideas.

Both research and experience have shown your position to be incorrect, in all kinds of sitations.

So, research and experience have shown that most promising ideas that will work are just randomly thrown out there without any refining at all?

I call bogus. You might be able to throw out ideas quickly, but without discussion, how are you to pick?

The problem, as I said, is that you're doing half the job and then calling it job done. A bit like restoring an old car by taking it apart and calling it good.

Is it likely that if you buy 100 old cars you'll get something really great? Sure. But I'd rather just buy one and put the money from the other 99 into fixing that one up. In the end, I'll have a running car, fully restored, and you'll have a junk-yard with 100 cars in it.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

05/15/2013 10:01:48 PM · #24

Originally posted by Cory:

Let's see about this. Bear's suggestion was to do a forced relocation, which were quite popular in the 1800's around here. Probably not a good idea though. Cowboy's suggestion was to nuke the whole lot. Also probably not practical.

You ARE aware of Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal", which caused an uproar when it was published and people didn't REALIZE it was satire? And yes, I thought you'd get the "relocate the Indians and give 'em cattle" parallel :-)

So I was being satirical, yessir.