n their activities and interests, humans and animals have several characteristics in common:
Animals eat. Human beings also have to eat.
Animals sleep. Human beings also need sleep.
Animals have sex to procreate. Humans also have sex.
Animals defend themselves; they fight. Human beings also have to defend themselves.
Despite the similarities, there is a fundamental difference between human beings and animals. What is that difference?
The distinction between the human form of life and the animal form of life is not that humans sleep on beds and animals sleep on the ground; it’s not that humans walk on two legs and many animals walk on four legs; it’s not that humans eat at a dining table with utensils and napkins while animals just eat with their mouth to the ground in some way. Humans are not meant to simply be refined animals. There is a much deeper and meaningful difference between humans and animals.
Beyond the activities humans and animals have in common (eating, sleeping, mating, and defending), human beings have a fifth faculty: the intelligence to inquire into the truth of our existence:
Who am I?
Why am I here? What is the purpose of my existence?
Why am I suffering?
How can I liberate myself from this suffering condition?
It is this extraordinarily valuable ability to be introspective—to question the meaning and purpose of our existence and endeavor to find a solution to human suffering—that sets humans apart from animals.
To use a “muscle” analogy, a person who has very big muscles can pick up a 100-pound bag of rice. But a five-year old lacks the muscles to pick up that 100-pound bag. In the less evolved condition, when a person is in the animal form of life, he doesn’t have the spiritual muscles to be introspective and to make spiritual advancement.
If a person is born in the human form of life but doesn’t use that spiritual muscle—doesn’t take advantage of the opportunity to find answers to his identity and make spiritual advancement— then his muscles are wasted.
As human beings, we have the opportunity to use our intelligence to seek answers to essential questions such as “Who am I?” and “What is the purpose of life?” If we don’t use the human form of life to seek answers to these all-important questions—if we simply remain preoccupied with Human–wildlife conflict
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Grand Canyon National Park hosts millions of visitors every year and is home to a population of Rocky Mountain elk. Interactions between humans and the elk sometimes results in injuries.[1]
Human–wildlife conflict refers to the interaction between wild animals and people and the resultant negative impact on people or their resources, or wild animals or their habitat. It occurs when growing human populations overlap with established wildlife territory, creating reduction of resources or life to some people and/or wild animals. The conflict takes many forms ranging from loss of life or injury to humans, and animals both wild and domesticated, to competition for scarce resources to loss and degradation of habitat.
Conflict management strategies earlier comprised lethal control, translational, regulation of population size and preservation of endangered species. Recent management approaches attempt to use scientific research for better management outcomes, such as behavior modification and reducing interaction. As human-wildlife conflicts inflict direct, indirect and opportunity costs, the mitigation of human-wildlife conflict is an important issue in the management of biodiversity and protected areas.
CoWildlife traditionally refers to non-domesticated animal species, but has come to include all plants, fungi and other organisms which grow or live wild in an area without being introduced by humans.[1] Domesticating wild plant and animal species for human benefit has occurred many times all over the planet, and has a major impact on the environment, both positive and negative.
Wildlife can be found in all ecosystems. Deserts, forests, rain forests, plains, grasslands, and other areas including the most developed urban sites, all have distinct forms of wildlife. While the term in popular culture usually refers to animals that are untouched by human factors,[2] most scientists agree that wildlife around is affected by human activities. Humans are Destructive to the wildlife environment
Humans have historically tended to separate civilization from wildlife in a number of ways including the legal, social, and moral sense. Some animals, however, have adapted to suburban environments. This includes such animals as domesticated cats, dogs, mice, and gerbils. Religions have often declared certain animals to be sacred, and in modern times concern for the natural environment has provoked activists to protest the exploitation of wildlife for human benefit or entertainment.
The global wildlife population has decreased by 52 percent between 1970 and 2014, according to a report by the World Wildlife Fund.[3]
Animals eat. Human beings also have to eat.
Animals sleep. Human beings also need sleep.
Animals have sex to procreate. Humans also have sex.
Animals defend themselves; they fight. Human beings also have to defend themselves.
Despite the similarities, there is a fundamental difference between human beings and animals. What is that difference?
The distinction between the human form of life and the animal form of life is not that humans sleep on beds and animals sleep on the ground; it’s not that humans walk on two legs and many animals walk on four legs; it’s not that humans eat at a dining table with utensils and napkins while animals just eat with their mouth to the ground in some way. Humans are not meant to simply be refined animals. There is a much deeper and meaningful difference between humans and animals.
Beyond the activities humans and animals have in common (eating, sleeping, mating, and defending), human beings have a fifth faculty: the intelligence to inquire into the truth of our existence:
Who am I?
Why am I here? What is the purpose of my existence?
Why am I suffering?
How can I liberate myself from this suffering condition?
It is this extraordinarily valuable ability to be introspective—to question the meaning and purpose of our existence and endeavor to find a solution to human suffering—that sets humans apart from animals.
To use a “muscle” analogy, a person who has very big muscles can pick up a 100-pound bag of rice. But a five-year old lacks the muscles to pick up that 100-pound bag. In the less evolved condition, when a person is in the animal form of life, he doesn’t have the spiritual muscles to be introspective and to make spiritual advancement.
If a person is born in the human form of life but doesn’t use that spiritual muscle—doesn’t take advantage of the opportunity to find answers to his identity and make spiritual advancement— then his muscles are wasted.
As human beings, we have the opportunity to use our intelligence to seek answers to essential questions such as “Who am I?” and “What is the purpose of life?” If we don’t use the human form of life to seek answers to these all-important questions—if we simply remain preoccupied with Human–wildlife conflict
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Grand Canyon National Park hosts millions of visitors every year and is home to a population of Rocky Mountain elk. Interactions between humans and the elk sometimes results in injuries.[1]
Human–wildlife conflict refers to the interaction between wild animals and people and the resultant negative impact on people or their resources, or wild animals or their habitat. It occurs when growing human populations overlap with established wildlife territory, creating reduction of resources or life to some people and/or wild animals. The conflict takes many forms ranging from loss of life or injury to humans, and animals both wild and domesticated, to competition for scarce resources to loss and degradation of habitat.
Conflict management strategies earlier comprised lethal control, translational, regulation of population size and preservation of endangered species. Recent management approaches attempt to use scientific research for better management outcomes, such as behavior modification and reducing interaction. As human-wildlife conflicts inflict direct, indirect and opportunity costs, the mitigation of human-wildlife conflict is an important issue in the management of biodiversity and protected areas.
CoWildlife traditionally refers to non-domesticated animal species, but has come to include all plants, fungi and other organisms which grow or live wild in an area without being introduced by humans.[1] Domesticating wild plant and animal species for human benefit has occurred many times all over the planet, and has a major impact on the environment, both positive and negative.
Wildlife can be found in all ecosystems. Deserts, forests, rain forests, plains, grasslands, and other areas including the most developed urban sites, all have distinct forms of wildlife. While the term in popular culture usually refers to animals that are untouched by human factors,[2] most scientists agree that wildlife around is affected by human activities. Humans are Destructive to the wildlife environment
Humans have historically tended to separate civilization from wildlife in a number of ways including the legal, social, and moral sense. Some animals, however, have adapted to suburban environments. This includes such animals as domesticated cats, dogs, mice, and gerbils. Religions have often declared certain animals to be sacred, and in modern times concern for the natural environment has provoked activists to protest the exploitation of wildlife for human benefit or entertainment.
The global wildlife population has decreased by 52 percent between 1970 and 2014, according to a report by the World Wildlife Fund.[3]
0 comments:
Post a Comment