In the context of my new job, I keep asking myself this question: Why do conservationists and I care about biodiversity?
Personally, I find it a hard-to-define, but certain feeling that biodiversity and nature must be protected in its pristine state. It is partly to do with its utilitarian value, but somehow I value it intrinsically and especially the individual life forms that live within nature. I also believe that we have so much to gain "spiritually" from appreciating and experiencing nature and wild animals. But at the same time I feel that I have to give more concrete reasons in terms of economics, environmental sustainability, food security and all the potential medical and technological discoveries, to other people to make them care about nature. And for that reason, because I want them to value biodiversity, I am always on the look out for arguments and facts in its favour.
This is why I found my reaction to a National Geographic magazine featuring biodiversity strange - I was disappointed and disturbed. From the first line of this "celebration" of biodiversity it only focussed on the utilitarian aspect of biodiversity from a human perspective and quickly went further to discuss how many bugs were foggered in the jungles of South America for a scientist's investigations and how the liver of some type of shark is an anti-cancer agent, and how frogs secrete powerful antibiotics when hurt. It made me realise that the only reason why many humans want to preserve biodiversity is to use it for science experiments and exploitation. It's not that I don't appreciate the amazing technology in nature and how it can help humans, but I am terrified that all this leads to is more suffering for animals that are captured, killed, sliced-and-diced, tested and milked for our benefit.
I just wish people would start to question the things that they do to animals. I realise animals are not as intelligent as us but we must question whether we have right to torture them even if it will help us dramatically. Medical research would probably be best tested on humans, but we don't do that because it is simply unacceptable.
No comments:
Post a Comment