Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

I swear to god, if some species literally waterboarded infant rabbits in the course of its reproductive cycle there'd be an environmentalist to pop up and worry about The Ecosystem every time anyone was like "I think we should probably get rid of the baby bunny waterboarders."

Given the sheer # of species humanity has eradicated because we liked purple feathers or because it was easier to hunt by driving entire generations of tasty things off cliffs, it'd be hilarious if taking *one* out just for being shitty was what finally caused ecological collapse

Unpopular opinion: since man is, by definition, part of nature, we don't *have* moral obligations towards ecology as a whole. We're not an alien creature from the outside! (We do, however, have *practical* obligations and the law of unintended consequences is very real.)

Assume the baby bunny waterboarders are on a different planet if your weird system of morals somehow implies that *that* is what matters

"Alien creature from the outside" was more like "outside nature". Guess that was crappy phrasing on my part. I don't hold The Ecosystem as a *moral* value at all (environmentalists usually do), only as a practical case of "will that fuck shit up somehow".

Other than that... "nature is red in tooth and claw" and such. Nature is far less kind to *itself* than environmentalists want to be to nature. :P

Bizarre to assume that you don't have any obligations to or within a system precisely *because* you're a part of it. Does this extend to families, workplaces, etc?

To put it in a different way: by the very definition of "nature", humans aren't doing anything that nature itself doesn't do. Would it be "immoral" for species X to drive species Y to extinction? No? Then why does that answer change if species X is homo sapiens?