The point of Avatar, why empathy is important and why humans are like cancer

[SnipErlite]

Just, say we found a new planet rich with resources, it would not surprise me if we went in, took everything useful (thereby draining it) and left.

But maybe I'm just a massive cynic

If we found a planet full of resources, we would utilize it. No point in letting those resources go to waste. However, that's not a bad thing. And I guarantee we would make attempts to renew all possible resources.

Even though a big faceless bastard corporation would probably get in charge of the extraction process?

 

[House_Vet]

What do you mean by "but even so"? That's a completley inaccurate way of describing modern human society. If we still had the pioneer attitude of consuming resources whilst making no attempt to preserve them, then we would have drained many of our renewable resources long ago. There are many efforts being made to preserve renewable resources such as water, trees, livestock, etc. A virus does nothing like that.

Sorry, it's just that I get angry when people compare humans to a virus. It's a complete misrepresentation of our species.

And before someone comes and tries to inform me of the horrors humans preform on a daily basis, I am already aware of them. I just don't judge our entire species based on those horrors alone.

The point with avatar is that the trees weren't just trees, they were a network that the natives connected with on a spiritual, and apparently also on a physical level.

They weren't just trees in avatar, unlike the trees we have on earth.

That's one of things I hate about Avatar. The connection between the Navi and nature is completley unrealistic.

I would say we are more like a parasite, we take what we can and give nothing in return.

Parasites are not aware of the damage they do to their hosts. Parasites do not try to keep their hosts alive. Parasites do not think of their host as anything other than food. Humans are not like that. We see Earth as far more than a pile of resources, hence why there is now a greater urge in modern society to preserve our planet.

The pioneer attitude is alive and well and kicking. What's our population these days? Where are these people going to live? Was anything resolved at copenhagen? Hell no. It's all politics, and scientists get the back row. I respect your optimism for the human race, but I worry that we are in danger of becoming quite parasitic.

If you worry that "The connection between the Navi and nature is completley unrealistic." then why did you go to see a sci-fi? And by the way, it's simply a physical metaphor for what asimov described earlier: Empathy and the consequent understanding of and bond to nature.

 

[dekkarax]

If we felt empathy for every single thing, we would have gone extinct long ago.

Often the only way to survive is to adapt to your situation. Every living creature does this, and if it means driving another species to extinction, it will be done by anything.

species do not show compassion to each other, it is often self destructive.

It's not pretty, but it happens all the time.

Humans never stopped being natural, we just became really good at surviving.

Note that when it comes to interactions between members of the same species, it's a completely different board game.

Just a bit of philosophical ramblings there.

Anyway, I'd say that you would be missing the point, I have not seen the film yet, though when I got a grasp of the basic setting the first thing that came to mind was the parallels with human oppression against other humans, i.e. the colonisation of the Americas.

 

[House_Vet]

Just, say we found a new planet rich with resources, it would not surprise me if we went in, took everything useful (thereby draining it) and left.

But maybe I'm just a massive cynic

If we found a planet full of resources, we would utilize it. No point in letting those resources go to waste. However, that's not a bad thing. And I guarantee we would make attempts to renew all possible resources.

You speak for all governments and corporations? Wow. /sarcasm

Did you see what the Chinese did to the Yangtzee river? Their entire country is (metaphorically) being strip mined. They are the new driving force in the economy by a country mile and you think everything will be fine!?

 

[Internet Kraken]

Actually, no. We are not more complicated than a disease. Diseases can be caused by everything from bacterium to viruses to prions to fungi to countless other agents we have no control over or grasp of. I haven't heard this speech you refer to, but we are no more complex than a prion, except on a very basic level, and we are not so much "more complex" as "equally complex on a different evolutionary path."

I understand what you are saying, but this speech is referring to the nature of humans. Not their biology.

And comparing humanity (or at least, human "civilization") to a cancer sounds exceptionally fair to me, thinking about all the places life will never flourish again in a dozen lifetimes for our actions.

Yes, but cancer just destroys and does nothing else. Humans at least make an attempt to preserve our habitat. The biggest difference between us and a disease is that we can contemplate or actions and understand their consequences. A disease can not do that.

This is why we need to learn from our mistakes rather than perpetuating them throughout history.

Exactly. This is how humans have managed to come so far as a species.

Why were the Native Americans (nearly) wiped out again? Oh yeah, we're STUPID.

No, it was because at that time the settlers had the pioneer attitude. Back then it was all about acquiring resources. To them, the idea of not exploting Native American land for the vast resources to be found in them was stupid.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Just, say we found a new planet rich with resources, it would not surprise me if we went in, took everything useful (thereby draining it) and left.

But maybe I'm just a massive cynic

If we found a planet full of resources, we would utilize it. No point in letting those resources go to waste. However, that's not a bad thing. And I guarantee we would make attempts to renew all possible resources.

You speak for all governments and corporations? Wow. /sarcasm

Did you see what the Chinese did to the Yangtzee river? Their entire country is (metaphorically) being strip mined. They are the new driving force in the economy by a country mile and you think everything will be fine!?

China is still a developing country. Hence their consumption of resources and treatment of resources is not nearly as efficient as that of a developed nation.

And the reason I said that we would try to renew resources is because that is both logical and profitable. WE are already starting to do that in our current society. Why would we suddenly stop doing that after we have achieved space travel? It's just not efficient.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Humans sort of are like cancer - described as such by a certain Agent.........

No

That is the worst way to describe the human race. It's completely inaccurate, and I can't believe that some people here that speech and actually agree with it.

Humans are not like a disease. We're far more complex than that.

Yeah I know, hence the sort of - plus I couldn't resist the Matrix reference

But we DO sort of move into an area, drain the resources and move on.

Well that's very oversimplified and probably not so true nowadays, but even so

What do you mean by "but even so"? That's a completley inaccurate way of describing modern human society. If we still had the pioneer attitude of consuming resources whilst making no attempt to preserve them, then we would have drained many of our renewable resources long ago. There are many efforts being made to preserve renewable resources such as water, trees, livestock, etc. A virus does nothing like that.

Sorry, it's just that I get angry when people compare humans to a virus. It's a complete misrepresentation of our species.

The thing I find even more amusing is that that speech was doubly wrong. Humans are perfectly capable of maintaining their environments, and animals are perfectly capable of draining them entirely. Anyone who thinks humans are the only ones that can change ecosystems aren't aware of Australia's rabbit problem, or cats in the Galapagos.

 

[House_Vet]

China is still a developing country. Hence their consumption of resources and treatment of resources is not nearly as efficient as that of a developed nation.

And the reason I said that we would try to renew resources is because that is both logical and profitable. WE are already starting to do that in our current society. Why would we suddenly stop doing that after we have achieved space travel? It's just not efficient.

The problem is that it is indeed profitable, but only in the long run. Tell voters/shareholders that they're going to lose money and what happens? You get your ass kicked at the next election when someone promises people tax cuts.

Our current society consumes roughly twice as much food per head as the Chinese, at 5 times the price. Waste? We wrote the book.

 

[mr Awsome]

I would say we are more like a parasite, we take what we can and give nothing in return.

Parasites are not aware of the damage they do to their hosts. Parasites do not try to keep their hosts alive. Parasites do not think of their host as anything other than food. Humans are not like that. We see Earth as far more than a pile of resources, hence why there is now a greater urge in modern society to preserve our planet.[/quote]

Humans didnt start trying to preserve the planet untill it started dieing. We were not aware of the damage being done untill now. We are parasites.

 

[House_Vet]

Humans sort of are like cancer - described as such by a certain Agent.........

No

That is the worst way to describe the human race. It's completely inaccurate, and I can't believe that some people here that speech and actually agree with it.

Humans are not like a disease. We're far more complex than that.

Yeah I know, hence the sort of - plus I couldn't resist the Matrix reference

But we DO sort of move into an area, drain the resources and move on.

Well that's very oversimplified and probably not so true nowadays, but even so

What do you mean by "but even so"? That's a completley inaccurate way of describing modern human society. If we still had the pioneer attitude of consuming resources whilst making no attempt to preserve them, then we would have drained many of our renewable resources long ago. There are many efforts being made to preserve renewable resources such as water, trees, livestock, etc. A virus does nothing like that.

Sorry, it's just that I get angry when people compare humans to a virus. It's a complete misrepresentation of our species.

The thing I find even more amusing is that that speech was doubly wrong. Humans are perfectly capable of maintaining their environments, and animals are perfectly capable of draining them entirely. Anyone who thinks humans are the only ones that can change ecosystems aren't aware of Australia's rabbit problem, or cats in the Galapagos.

Your argument isn't valid. The cats, rabbits and rats were introduced by people, therefore not a natural phoenomenon.

 

[Internet Kraken]

The pioneer attitude is alive and well and kicking. What's our population these days? Where are these people going to live? Was anything resolved at copenhagen? Hell no. It's all politics, and scientists get the back row. I respect your optimism for the human race, but I worry that we are in danger of becoming quite parasitic.

Yes the pioneer attitude is still present, but it's not nearly as prevalent. And while we are certainly a long way from living in harmony with our environment, I believe that we will eventually get there. Keep in mind that it is only in recent history that we have begun to understand the true impact of our actions upon the environment. I guess you could say that we are "evolving" out of our parasitic nature.

If you worry that "The connection between the Navi and nature is completley unrealistic." then why did you go to see a sci-fi? And by the way, it's simply a physical metaphor for what asimov described earlier: Empathy and the consequent understanding of and bond to nature.

I expect to see unrealistic thing sin a scifi movie, but my problem with it is that you inevitably compare the Navi's connection with nature to that of human's. The Navi were flawless and lived in perfect harmony with their environment. It's just not fair to compare our species to one that is nearly perfect.

And I was disappointed with Copenhagen as well.

 

[Lavi]

Err, chopping down a tree isn't wrong. (With exceptions of course)
The point with avatar is that the trees weren't just trees, they were a network that the natives connected with on a spiritual, and apparently also on a physical level.

They weren't just trees in avatar, unlike the trees we have on earth.

... I'm not sure how to word how stupid that is so this might fail: I'm pretty sure the Indigenous around the world do exactly that with our trees.

EDIT: To the below, everything is better with aliens.

 

[Poofs]

go hug a tree
btw the movies plot was basically a remake of Pocahontas oly with more aliens and some interspecies sex thrown into the mix

 

[Ham_authority95]

Yeah I see what you are saying

I think that humans are advanced enough now that, as a whole, can put other life on earth before ours.

But as a plot for Avatar, it really fit. It was simple enough as to not distract you from all the work that was put into its computer-generated animation

 

[Ham_authority95]

I dont quite agree with you on the point you making about empathy.
I agree its selective,but its also selectivley applied to other humans as well,The Holocust,The Inquisition etc.
I think our technology is progressing faster than our ability to gauge its impact on our lives and the world around us.

Yeah this is a better way to say it.

 

[Mr.Squishy]

**warning, rant and tired-people-logic (moon logic!)**
Thank you OP, for making me feel like a real fucking guilty bastard. Thank you for making me feel like an asshole for all of mankind's collective sins. Thank you for making me feel awful about many many things I am in no control of nor have any influence on because i am a unsignificant little ****. Most of all, thank you so, so, much for making me feel more empathy thanI have in a long time. It really helps when the world is in the condition it is. I don't remember who exactly said this, but a wise person did say that "you can not be very receptive (or was it responsive..) to the world without being very sad often" or something to that effect.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Humans sort of are like cancer - described as such by a certain Agent.........

No

That is the worst way to describe the human race. It's completely inaccurate, and I can't believe that some people here that speech and actually agree with it.

Humans are not like a disease. We're far more complex than that.

Yeah I know, hence the sort of - plus I couldn't resist the Matrix reference

But we DO sort of move into an area, drain the resources and move on.

Well that's very oversimplified and probably not so true nowadays, but even so

What do you mean by "but even so"? That's a completley inaccurate way of describing modern human society. If we still had the pioneer attitude of consuming resources whilst making no attempt to preserve them, then we would have drained many of our renewable resources long ago. There are many efforts being made to preserve renewable resources such as water, trees, livestock, etc. A virus does nothing like that.

Sorry, it's just that I get angry when people compare humans to a virus. It's a complete misrepresentation of our species.

The thing I find even more amusing is that that speech was doubly wrong. Humans are perfectly capable of maintaining their environments, and animals are perfectly capable of draining them entirely. Anyone who thinks humans are the only ones that can change ecosystems aren't aware of Australia's rabbit problem, or cats in the Galapagos.

Your argument isn't valid. The cats, rabbits and rats were introduced by people, therefore not a natural phoenomenon.

That doesn't invalidate my point at all. Humans are a convenient delivery vehicle, but they didn't goad the cats into exterminating local bird species, or other animals into destroying vegetation and species. It would have been no different if the animals had been introduced in some other way (forced migration, washing ashore, etc.).

 

[House_Vet]

Yes the pioneer attitude is still present, but it's not nearly as prevalent. And while we are certainly a long way from living in harmony with our environment, I believe that we will eventually get there. Keep in mind that it is only in recent history that we have begun to understand the true impact of our actions upon the environment. I guess you could say that we are "evolving" out of our parasitic nature.

I'll go with that. You're quite right, I just hope it isn't too late. Even if it isn't we're going to lose some important natural resources (in the sense of species etc) and that makes me a little snappy.

I expect to see unrealistic things in a scifi movie, but my problem with it is that you inevitably compare the Navi's connection with nature to that of human's. The Navi were flawless and lived in perfect harmony with their environment. It's just not fair to compare our species to one that is nearly perfect.

And I was disappointed with Copenhagen as well.

Well, I guess I think we're being told to aspire to perfection. But also, it fuels another aspect of the metaphor - the whole colonization message stems from an industrial vs "natural" racial conflict.

P.S. Inspiring discussion is part of what (for me) makes this movie something more than your average blockbuster.

 

[dmase]

This is were i post a link to wikipedia, Charles Darwin specifically I will not but thats basically my argument. I think that humans would try a lot more diplomatic approach to gaining the all important resource from Avatar, unless of course China found the planet first then those blue guys are fucked.