The point of Avatar, why empathy is important and why humans are like cancer
- Thread starter Asimov
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actually the point was to enjoy the movie for what it is, and I did very much so. No doubt it is a good movie but going on about "you must appreciate the scenary" or "humans are an evil virus" is not how it works, humans made the movie didn't they?
The graphics were great of course but it didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness, I have seen great scenes in better movies that had that effect on me and I was a little disappointed with the aliens, they are exactly like Indians which I find to be pretty lame so don't expect people to feel sorry for a alien rip off.
The graphics were great of course but it didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness, I have seen great scenes in better movies that had that effect on me and I was a little disappointed with the aliens, they are exactly like Indians which I find to be pretty lame so don't expect people to feel sorry for a alien rip off.
As much as i like to believe that every person is an asshole.
Its people like you
You would compare cutting down a tree to cutting a person's legs off and say that they are equally as bad.
So would you condemn the people a long time ago that cut down trees to make homes in colder climates so they could survive?
Would you support the trivialising of the holocaust by comparing it to the killing of chickens like peta did?
Humans are not parasites and the green movement is proof of that along with the endangered species list and national parks. We as a civilization are working to save our planet.
Its people like you who say we need to empathize with animals and nature while trivializing human suffering that have no empathy for their fellow man. Its people like you who make callous comments that bring mankind down.
Its people like you
that really piss me off. I have never watched Avatar nor do i wish to waste the money to do so.Asimov said:
You would compare cutting down a tree to cutting a person's legs off and say that they are equally as bad.
So would you condemn the people a long time ago that cut down trees to make homes in colder climates so they could survive?
Would you support the trivialising of the holocaust by comparing it to the killing of chickens like peta did?
Humans are not parasites and the green movement is proof of that along with the endangered species list and national parks. We as a civilization are working to save our planet.
Its people like you who say we need to empathize with animals and nature while trivializing human suffering that have no empathy for their fellow man. Its people like you who make callous comments that bring mankind down.
First of all, we all know what the point of avatar was, and it's been done a million times before.
Second, so what?
Second, so what?
A counter point - I believe we're the only thing on this planet that's worth a damn.
You are committing a grave logical fallacy - you are anthropomorphizing nature. You are taking your own emotions, your own sense of beauty at the wonder of nature, and you are saying that is how the universe feels, and that is how nature feels.
This is not the case. There is no mother earth, there is no "gaia" or nature spirit. The planet itself is not alive (it is in fact, if I'm not mistaken, a giant ball of rock, a substance that has a particular lack of emotions), although the things on the planet are.
Is life precious? It is certainly interesting. But don't impose your values on nature. Nature is not you. Nature does not find beauty within itself because nature is just a composite collection of all living things. It has no consciousness. Some animals have limited consciousness, to be sure, but their intellectual abilities fall far short of what human beings can do.
Can planets comprehend the true majesty of the stars? Can a dog look at the proof of Fermat's theorem and feel wonder and joy? Can a starfish learn the principles of optical reflection and light refraction and create optical fiber? No. They cannot.
You push your emotions into animals and plants. You think that they feel the same way you do, even though you do not have a shred of evidence for this. You feel as if all of nature is wonderful and glorious, without also looking at the terrible aspect of wild animals. You say it is evil when a human harms and animal, without considering the fact that animals have far less developed morals than human beings. Insects regularly eat their own young. Wild dogs tear at each other. Polar Bears slaughter seals and penguins without even eating the dead flesh. An animal has no qualms about killing people, or even members of their own species. Animals are not 'moral'. The limited damage they can do is due to their own stupidity.
Human beings have morals. We have ideals. Even if we do not always live up to them. We have ideology, we have science, we have mathematics! We are the ONLY species that can improve on what we are, we are the ONLY species that can direct its will to a goal and comprehend our own existence in its entirety. And we are the only species that has a hope in hell of avoiding extinction.
Did you know that almost all species that have existed have gone extinct? Believe it or not, species were dying off even before human beings were around. 99% of all animals that have ever existed, have died off or been replaced by other species.
The same fate awaits all other species except for humanity. Even if human beings were not around, eventually life would die on this planet. Meteor impacts, disease, volcanic eruption and the eventual death of the sun itself means that life is destined towards destruction.
Except for humanity. We have potential. We have technology. We are the only species that has a HOPE IN HELL of ever making it off this rock. We are the ONLY species which has the potential to protect itself from inevitable demise. Granted we have damaged the planet with our industrialization, but we will probably invent new technologies to fix the problem or even replace parts of nature. And all environmental problems can be tied DIRECTLY to over-population. Rational individuals like myself advocate birth control measures and population control measures, much like China's One-Child policy, to limit any damage done to the environment. Predictably, no one listens.
We are the only species that has the concepts of art or beauty. Without us, who would look upon nature and wonder at its marvels? Trees CANNOT admire themselves, a rainforest CANNOT treasure itself, nature CANNOT find value in itself. It is US who find value in nature. Without us, nothing has any inherent meaning. We make the values.
Humanity is the only thing worth saving. Consciousness, intelligence, sentience, are the only things worth a damn in this entire universe.
You are committing a grave logical fallacy - you are anthropomorphizing nature. You are taking your own emotions, your own sense of beauty at the wonder of nature, and you are saying that is how the universe feels, and that is how nature feels.
This is not the case. There is no mother earth, there is no "gaia" or nature spirit. The planet itself is not alive (it is in fact, if I'm not mistaken, a giant ball of rock, a substance that has a particular lack of emotions), although the things on the planet are.
Is life precious? It is certainly interesting. But don't impose your values on nature. Nature is not you. Nature does not find beauty within itself because nature is just a composite collection of all living things. It has no consciousness. Some animals have limited consciousness, to be sure, but their intellectual abilities fall far short of what human beings can do.
Can planets comprehend the true majesty of the stars? Can a dog look at the proof of Fermat's theorem and feel wonder and joy? Can a starfish learn the principles of optical reflection and light refraction and create optical fiber? No. They cannot.
You push your emotions into animals and plants. You think that they feel the same way you do, even though you do not have a shred of evidence for this. You feel as if all of nature is wonderful and glorious, without also looking at the terrible aspect of wild animals. You say it is evil when a human harms and animal, without considering the fact that animals have far less developed morals than human beings. Insects regularly eat their own young. Wild dogs tear at each other. Polar Bears slaughter seals and penguins without even eating the dead flesh. An animal has no qualms about killing people, or even members of their own species. Animals are not 'moral'. The limited damage they can do is due to their own stupidity.
Human beings have morals. We have ideals. Even if we do not always live up to them. We have ideology, we have science, we have mathematics! We are the ONLY species that can improve on what we are, we are the ONLY species that can direct its will to a goal and comprehend our own existence in its entirety. And we are the only species that has a hope in hell of avoiding extinction.
Did you know that almost all species that have existed have gone extinct? Believe it or not, species were dying off even before human beings were around. 99% of all animals that have ever existed, have died off or been replaced by other species.
The same fate awaits all other species except for humanity. Even if human beings were not around, eventually life would die on this planet. Meteor impacts, disease, volcanic eruption and the eventual death of the sun itself means that life is destined towards destruction.
Except for humanity. We have potential. We have technology. We are the only species that has a HOPE IN HELL of ever making it off this rock. We are the ONLY species which has the potential to protect itself from inevitable demise. Granted we have damaged the planet with our industrialization, but we will probably invent new technologies to fix the problem or even replace parts of nature. And all environmental problems can be tied DIRECTLY to over-population. Rational individuals like myself advocate birth control measures and population control measures, much like China's One-Child policy, to limit any damage done to the environment. Predictably, no one listens.
We are the only species that has the concepts of art or beauty. Without us, who would look upon nature and wonder at its marvels? Trees CANNOT admire themselves, a rainforest CANNOT treasure itself, nature CANNOT find value in itself. It is US who find value in nature. Without us, nothing has any inherent meaning. We make the values.
Humanity is the only thing worth saving. Consciousness, intelligence, sentience, are the only things worth a damn in this entire universe.
It's not that people don't have empathy, it's more that our selfish nature tends to over-ride it most of the time.
This doesn't just apply to the environment, we treat eachother appalingly too.
We really can be a disgusting species.
I think I'm feeling a little misanthropic this week after seeing Encyclopedia Dramatica: Offended for the first time...
This doesn't just apply to the environment, we treat eachother appalingly too.
We really can be a disgusting species.
I think I'm feeling a little misanthropic this week after seeing Encyclopedia Dramatica: Offended for the first time...
Another quote that is overused. Guilt should not be multi-generational. It's the same kind of retarded logic people use to say that all jews are bad because a jew betrayed jesus (faulty logic for using fiction in the first place as a fact, and additionally, it was romans who did the killing, and most christain culture idolizes romans). As a white american, I am told I should feel guilty about slavery. Why? My family came here from Norway AFTER slavery was abolished. Even if they were here, the 'sins' of the father are not visited upon any later generation. I'm not saying that you shouldn't learn from history, I'm saying that you shouldn't dwell on the past. Concentrate on making the world a better place, especially if it involves advancing science.moe19911 said:
Thanks for speaking out for me, I really like the idea of some guy i don't know declaring what my beliefs are before I have a chance to say them. Heres a few for you.
-I like most animals, however, most wild animals will try to attack me cause they are either afraid of me, see me as a threat to offspring, or want my guts for food, this does not make me hate them, its their way of life. They must kill to eat, most species cannot farm or use tools. I must also eat, if I must, I will kill an animal solely to eat it.
-Trees have SENSES not FEELINGS. just because a plant or tree reacts to singing does not give it emotions. I do not cut down trees unless it is for menial constructional purposes such as shelters, if a cave is accessible, I will use it. Trees and/or plants may also provide food, I will take advantage of this. I DO BELIEVE that trees are ecological vital, therefore, I do not support mass logging.
-I DO feel empathy for animals, as an elephant might feel sorrow for loss of life, I can understand this. This does not mean I should weep and whale at their loss, what good comes of stopping to bawl my eyes out when i should stand strong and prevent an unjust or cruel death of another elephant. Empathy isn't just feeling sorry, its understanding the way of others, and the way of life as it is. Animals struggle everyday, but they survive by their means, and we survive by others. I do not support the idea of killing animals without a truly valid reason, revenge is not among them. If an animal attacks a human, it was likely provoked or already under stress, it is the human's own fault for tempting the attack in some way. Animals are animals, they cannot act morally or with perfect logic.
-If I were ever to encounter an alien species, I would tell them to pass Earth by and never come back. That we are not ready for contact yet.
- Earth is indeed a majestic and beautiful place. And I DO SEE what is happening and have worked to help slow or prevent further damage. But i cannot convince 5,999,999,999 other humans in over 193 countries, some fraction of which are developing int heir industrial ages.. to stop. One person is most certainly NOT ENOUGH. Responsibility and action must be taken as a whole. We cannot forcibly or by mission of action make other nations comply.
-I live a life of middle class and hospitality. You reserve no rights/privileges that say in general humans live in the excess. If you must, turn your attention to our very own country and if so, many others. Poverty is all around you. I donate to charities almost every day, but i cannot be expected to give all that I have, not out of distrust, but out of my own need to live off income. I help and give food where I can. But because I do not always give, does not make me an evil person.
-This may seem roundabout, but. I enjoy life's little luxuries when I earn them. I did not kill an animal to achieve this, throw no stones in your glass house. I do not believe in saving only the majestic animals. But i do believe in saving only the ones that are in danger and are critical to ecosystem survival. Unfortunately, some animals reproduce so explosively, that it poses no threat when one is killed, and 10 can fill it's place a year after. Also, the introduction of foreign species to a new ecosystem is NOT MY FAULT.
-I would not slay one hundred animals to save a human life, unless these animals were directly attacking them, and if they were defenseless. By my own oath, i cannot and will not harm a living being, sentient lest my life or another be threatened. I would without a doubt kill an animal to save one of my own species, but not if that animal hasn't threatened their life. A number of animal species live solitary lives, it is doubtful one would have any moral inclination to sacrifice itself to save another lest it were it's young. Now, animals that live lives together, likely would, and not because it was right, but because it meant their survival. What is right, and what is for survival mean different things. Humans are communal creatures, we mate for life, have companions, its natural for us to DEFEND ONE ANOTHER.
Quite honestly you should feel ashamed for writing such judgmental post. When I want to be spoken for, I'll ask no one but myself unless I lose the ability to speak, or am no longer capable of sound judgment or thought. Reading your post was actually quite offensive and painful to my personal well being. You should watch Avatar again, and PAY ATTENTION to Neyt'yri in her opening scene. Also, I recommend you put some serious forethought into your words before you write them.
There are messages to be understood in Avatar. You, quite obviously, failed to grasp a great deal while watching it. Empathy is not just about having or feeling similar emotions, its about understanding them.
EDIT: Humans are about as much like cancer as ants are to the Earth. A mastery of their own world and a mastery of our world has allowed us and them to dominate nearly every continent except for the polar caps. By the "Human Cancer" logic. This would include nearly every species of insect, Rats and one celled organisms. While you can argue that humans are by far the most destructive species in Earths natural history, we are the most intelligent, we can easily recognize and from a moral standpoint, take measures to repair or prevent damage. Like most children however, we exhaust our mother, but in out latter days, we may end up caring for her instead.
-I like most animals, however, most wild animals will try to attack me cause they are either afraid of me, see me as a threat to offspring, or want my guts for food, this does not make me hate them, its their way of life. They must kill to eat, most species cannot farm or use tools. I must also eat, if I must, I will kill an animal solely to eat it.
-Trees have SENSES not FEELINGS. just because a plant or tree reacts to singing does not give it emotions. I do not cut down trees unless it is for menial constructional purposes such as shelters, if a cave is accessible, I will use it. Trees and/or plants may also provide food, I will take advantage of this. I DO BELIEVE that trees are ecological vital, therefore, I do not support mass logging.
-I DO feel empathy for animals, as an elephant might feel sorrow for loss of life, I can understand this. This does not mean I should weep and whale at their loss, what good comes of stopping to bawl my eyes out when i should stand strong and prevent an unjust or cruel death of another elephant. Empathy isn't just feeling sorry, its understanding the way of others, and the way of life as it is. Animals struggle everyday, but they survive by their means, and we survive by others. I do not support the idea of killing animals without a truly valid reason, revenge is not among them. If an animal attacks a human, it was likely provoked or already under stress, it is the human's own fault for tempting the attack in some way. Animals are animals, they cannot act morally or with perfect logic.
-If I were ever to encounter an alien species, I would tell them to pass Earth by and never come back. That we are not ready for contact yet.
- Earth is indeed a majestic and beautiful place. And I DO SEE what is happening and have worked to help slow or prevent further damage. But i cannot convince 5,999,999,999 other humans in over 193 countries, some fraction of which are developing int heir industrial ages.. to stop. One person is most certainly NOT ENOUGH. Responsibility and action must be taken as a whole. We cannot forcibly or by mission of action make other nations comply.
-I live a life of middle class and hospitality. You reserve no rights/privileges that say in general humans live in the excess. If you must, turn your attention to our very own country and if so, many others. Poverty is all around you. I donate to charities almost every day, but i cannot be expected to give all that I have, not out of distrust, but out of my own need to live off income. I help and give food where I can. But because I do not always give, does not make me an evil person.
-This may seem roundabout, but. I enjoy life's little luxuries when I earn them. I did not kill an animal to achieve this, throw no stones in your glass house. I do not believe in saving only the majestic animals. But i do believe in saving only the ones that are in danger and are critical to ecosystem survival. Unfortunately, some animals reproduce so explosively, that it poses no threat when one is killed, and 10 can fill it's place a year after. Also, the introduction of foreign species to a new ecosystem is NOT MY FAULT.
-I would not slay one hundred animals to save a human life, unless these animals were directly attacking them, and if they were defenseless. By my own oath, i cannot and will not harm a living being, sentient lest my life or another be threatened. I would without a doubt kill an animal to save one of my own species, but not if that animal hasn't threatened their life. A number of animal species live solitary lives, it is doubtful one would have any moral inclination to sacrifice itself to save another lest it were it's young. Now, animals that live lives together, likely would, and not because it was right, but because it meant their survival. What is right, and what is for survival mean different things. Humans are communal creatures, we mate for life, have companions, its natural for us to DEFEND ONE ANOTHER.
Quite honestly you should feel ashamed for writing such judgmental post. When I want to be spoken for, I'll ask no one but myself unless I lose the ability to speak, or am no longer capable of sound judgment or thought. Reading your post was actually quite offensive and painful to my personal well being. You should watch Avatar again, and PAY ATTENTION to Neyt'yri in her opening scene. Also, I recommend you put some serious forethought into your words before you write them.
There are messages to be understood in Avatar. You, quite obviously, failed to grasp a great deal while watching it. Empathy is not just about having or feeling similar emotions, its about understanding them.
EDIT: Humans are about as much like cancer as ants are to the Earth. A mastery of their own world and a mastery of our world has allowed us and them to dominate nearly every continent except for the polar caps. By the "Human Cancer" logic. This would include nearly every species of insect, Rats and one celled organisms. While you can argue that humans are by far the most destructive species in Earths natural history, we are the most intelligent, we can easily recognize and from a moral standpoint, take measures to repair or prevent damage. Like most children however, we exhaust our mother, but in out latter days, we may end up caring for her instead.
If more people thought like that, the world would be a much more enlightened and intelligent place.Korolev said:
But, alas, it is not so. A lot of people will especially take aversion with your points about population control, and then turn around and cry over the land near their house being bulldozed to make a new apartment complex.
Either way, Humans do not have the ability to link physically with the 'earth' or the 'animals' around them, so any proposed 'link' is purely metaphysical, and not actually existent (like it is in the film). That which is metaphysical may be based on logic, but the truth-value is subject to doubt.
If the point of the film was to draw a similarity between the human race and the Navi, then it failed, as they have the ability to physically 'link' with the planet and its animals.
However, you've got to admit, if you look at the film another way, humans are pretty damned awesome. We do not have the ability to harness winged animals via a complicated partnering process - we created planes, and subsequent combat and inter-planetary transport. We do not have a natural network to plug into- so we created telephony and internet communication soon after. We can't ride huge animals in combat - but we created mechanical advantages like tanks or the mecha-suits. Any weapons used in the climactic battle against the human invaders were amplified by the human intervention of said Avatars (like the arrow's ability to break through glass by diving down whilst shooting the arrow - an obvious nod to our physics). This and the small fact that there was a limited amount of human 'aliens' and it took the entire planet's lifeforms to repel us.
The moral, to me, was humans are awesome and only lose when faced by non-existent supernatural forces (as well as the entire planet's animals simultaneously attacking... which is unlikely to happen).
Much of this has been said, but I had to voice my opinion after losing nine American bucks and almost three hours of my life to the mate who directed 'Titanic...'
If the point of the film was to draw a similarity between the human race and the Navi, then it failed, as they have the ability to physically 'link' with the planet and its animals.
However, you've got to admit, if you look at the film another way, humans are pretty damned awesome. We do not have the ability to harness winged animals via a complicated partnering process - we created planes, and subsequent combat and inter-planetary transport. We do not have a natural network to plug into- so we created telephony and internet communication soon after. We can't ride huge animals in combat - but we created mechanical advantages like tanks or the mecha-suits. Any weapons used in the climactic battle against the human invaders were amplified by the human intervention of said Avatars (like the arrow's ability to break through glass by diving down whilst shooting the arrow - an obvious nod to our physics). This and the small fact that there was a limited amount of human 'aliens' and it took the entire planet's lifeforms to repel us.
The moral, to me, was humans are awesome and only lose when faced by non-existent supernatural forces (as well as the entire planet's animals simultaneously attacking... which is unlikely to happen).
Much of this has been said, but I had to voice my opinion after losing nine American bucks and almost three hours of my life to the mate who directed 'Titanic...'
I'm going to have a field day here.
I'm going to end this by saying that there is no species on Earth that shows as much compassion towards other members of their own species, or to members of another species than human beings do. And that's a fact.
If by amazing world you mean amazing visuals, than yes. I however could not be immersed because the themes of the movie were too obvious and the viewer was bashed over the face with it. I have no problem with the themes the movie has, they were just done too obviously. It doesn't matter what allegory a movie has, if it beats me over the head with it, I won't like it.Asimov said:
We kill off animals who are genuine threats? OH MY GOD! So, we are exactly the same as every other species on the planet? This is the main fault in your "nature first" argument. Nature is brutal. You people think that in the animal world everyone treats each other with respect? What a load of rubbish. Animals kill things that are a threat without remorse. It's imperative to their survival. Humans are one of, if not the only, species that feels remorse after killing things. Humans are the most compassionate species on Earth. Yes, we are also the most destructive - but that's a case of our technology and our intellect more so than our nature. Most predatory animals have a far more brutal nature than humans.Asimov said:
Oh please. We don't see what we are doing? Rubbish. We see it at least once a week in "pro green" propaganda. Everyone is aware there are habitats being destroyed. Did you ever think that in most cases (I'm not saying all cases)it was necessary? Are you aware of how over populated this planet is? Either make room for more people, or create legislation outlawing childbirth. You choose.Asimov said:
If you think we are a cancer, why don't you do your part for mother nature and kill yourself? If you truly believe that humanity is destroying the Earth, why don't you do your part and destroy your contribution to this cancer? I'm not trying to encourage suicide here, I'm just pointing out a hole in your argument. You are a human as well. You are contributing to this planet being fucked over as well. Maybe not as some as others, but you still are.Asimov said:
We have no empathy? You are so, so wrong. Humans have more empathy than any other species on Earth. What other species is willing to give up their life in order to help others as frequently as humans? What other species dedicate their lives to save members of a different species? Many, many humans have dedicated their lives to fight for animal rights - last time I checked they count as humans too, so stop acting like all humans are like the blatantly stereotypical villains in your favorite little movie. Hell, even the government has measures in place to protect animal species. Last time I checked, there are many many laws in place to protect animal habitats and to protect animal well being. So, can you please name me some of your beloved animals who do as much for other species as we do?Asimov said:
Species thrive on the ability to connect and to have relations with each other. It's part of our survival.Asimov said:
One of the stupidest, no the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say. I'll let you in on a little secret. The real reason why humans don't care as much about a tree dying as opposed to another human is because a tree does not have a brain. A tree does not have relationships. A tree does not influence people. A tree does not have the ability to love, to entertain or to show compassion or friendship to people. Humans do.Asimov said:
Stop your generalizing. Stop saying "we". One thing that is true about Humans that isn't as true about animals is that our personalities are incredibly complex and differ extremely. I know many people who feel extreme empathy for animal deaths. I had a cat since I was 5 years old who died last year, and I locked myself away in my room for 2 days crying. I felt extreme sorrow. Would it have been the same amount of sorrow that I would have felt if a human died? No. Of course not. It's a biological fact that I am more likely to enjoy a friendship with something of my own species than something that isn't.Asimov said:
I'm going to end this by saying that there is no species on Earth that shows as much compassion towards other members of their own species, or to members of another species than human beings do. And that's a fact.
This is gold. The only part I don't agree with is the One-Child policy. China is extremely brutal to it's children. There are many problems with China, but to stay on topic, I feel that a One-Child policy would lead us into eugenics, which as you know , is well, terrible.Korolev said:
Agreed. Almost any animal would eat you to survival. It's instincts. We also have survival instincts.LockeDown said: