Trees are superior to humans.

Originally posted by Halicarnassus
I like your idea, but humans also have very interesting purposes on this earth. We serve as hosts for many kinds of bacteria, viruses and fungi and survive in a symbiotic relationship.

Indeed we do, good point. I am biased and consider those 'bad' life and worthless, though

It's true we destroy everything, but we also have the potential to create forests and other ecosystems where life might be impossible, thus helping to the success of thousands of species, it's just that we have not exploited that quality.

It's the fact that we don't use that potential enough. Is it better to have knowledge and not use it for the right purposes or not have knowledge at all?

We, as an intelligent species, help develop the intelligence of other animals around us. We teach to dogs, cats, chimpanzees, elephants, dolphins, parrots, etc. While their wild counterparts do not have the opportunity to develop in such a way, those animals will become the masters of the planet if humas ever disappear.

I see where you're going with this one, but I think that trained animals have a tendency to be so domesticated that they have a worse chance at survival in a natural environment than their counterparts. They are so used to being fed they might not know how to feed themselves in the wild.

A certain species of tree is adapted to a very specific climate, while humans have much more flexibility on that. Thus, whatever the global climatic scenario is, us and other species are proof of the existence of life, the most awesome natural phenomenon there exists.

Not sure what you mean here, because trees, although not able to relocate or survive dramatic temperature changes, are signs of life themselves too, no?

All animals depend on plants directly or indirectly, but when we die, plants themselves, as well as all kinds of microosganisms feed on our remains.

As they should, for the continuing survival of their species. As we should eat plants and animals for our survival. But when we have the USA overindulging and becoming statistically fatter, Third World countries have countless starving.

So there you have some purposes for humans to exist. I think we are superior to trees, because of intelligence. What you should rather say is that trees are in general more valuable for the life on earth.

When I wrote the OP it was late and I was tired, I just wanted to write it down before I forgot; more valuable would be better terminology. However, in my definition of superior I excluded intelligence, simply because that intelligence is worthless if we choose to harm more than help. With morality comes a greater responsibility for taking care of all things which do not have this ability to choose, think, or will.

Originally posted by Alexander_Supertramp
Edit to add: thanks Lloyd45, you are the first person that's noticed/recognized my screename!

[edit on 28-7-2008 by Alexander_Supertramp]

No problem Alexander. Chris' untimely death and the events leading up to it saddened me greatly. Glad to see others haven't forgot him.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by LLoyd45]

Originally posted by Alexander_Supertramp
First, I want to start off by stating what exactly I mean by "superior." The goal of life, as I have seen it at least, is to continue survival. So, as far as any living thing on this Earth goes, the more able a species is at surviving, the more superior the species.

*Side note: I will use the word trees to represent all plants*

A species only continues to exist on this planet because humans (as a species) allow it to exist. You think we'd have any problem at ALL of getting rid of the trees if we wanted to? I'm talking about chopping down every single tree on the planet. You think that would be tremendously difficult if we REALLY wanted to do that?

Name one other species who holds life in the balance like that. That's right, you can't. Humans are the only species on the planet that determines not only their OWN fate, but the fate of all other species. THAT'S superiority.

Looked at another way: Humans survive in many places that trees cannot survive. So, by your own definition, humans are superior.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by sir_chancealot]

reply to post by sir_chancealot

A species only continues to exist on this planet because humans (as a species) allow it to exist. You think we'd have any problem at ALL of getting rid of the trees if we wanted to? I'm talking about chopping down every single tree on the planet. You think that would be tremendously difficult if we REALLY wanted to do that?

Name one other species who holds life in the balance like that. That's right, you can't. Humans are the only species on the planet that determines not only their OWN fate, but the fate of all other species. THAT'S superiority.

So because we can be maliciously self-centered and evil, by killing off not only other life but ourselves through war, etc., we are superior? More powerful, yes; but this only shows our superiority if we choose to bring about good, and help other life survive, instead of to destroy everything.

Looked at another way: Humans survive in many places that trees cannot survive. So, by your own definition, humans are superior.

We are constantly killing each other through wars, murder, and plain old lack of humble, caring service to others. I don't see that as superior when, unlike all other life, we have the ability to rationalize and choose NOT to do so. With all of our intelligence, we should know better.

I also want to add that we have brought more devastation onto this planet than any other species before us. We are the most intelligent life inhabiting this planet yet we bring about the most destruction...how is this superior? We have the potential to be superior, yet when we choose not to help the environment, we are no more than an infectious disease.