All animals kill to have their domination. We as humans also belong to the animal species. Our basic instincts are similar. We have invented sophisticated instruments to kill other human beings. Reason and labels may vary but killing is common tactic to achieve domination.
But I was under the impression that animals only killed when they were hungry. They do not kill to have their dominance over anyone but the human is the only animal that kills for the sake of kick or for the purpose of showing his mastery over weaker ones. Some human races/persons go to any distance to prove their point.
Animals kill other animals when they are hungry. This is one aspect. But Animals kill other animals with the motive of dominating is also another aspect.
" Survival of the Fittest " is not only a Jungle law it's true in every living organism. Here in this case man being the animal with brain and thinking power, took the advantage and gained dominance over the other species.
All animals kill to have their domination. We as humans also belong to the animal species. Our basic instincts are similar. We have invented sophisticated instruments to kill other human beings. Reason and labels may vary but killing is common tactic to achieve domination.
But I was under the impression that animals only killed when they were hungry. They do not kill to have their dominance over anyone but the human is the only animal that kills for the sake of kick or for the purpose of showing his mastery over weaker ones. Some human races/persons go to any distance to prove their point.
Very true, in that respect animals are far better than human beings although at times they do display animosity against a rival and go to any extent ..
Pay no mind to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !!!
Hunger is one reason why they kill. Up the chain they do kill for dominance because that ensures many supplies like food, sex, security, shelter etc. Man also needs all these and if necessary resorts to killing. Living beings have a desire to dominate and this is a undeniable fact. Those who say they do not have have accepted the realty and preach to the contrary. It is a perfectly normal desire but tempered by the fact that man can think and create systems where killing is not necessary. But to create that system killings do take palce right from Ashoka the Great's time till today and shall continue in future also. If groups of persons or even countries are not prepared to kill they fall prey to those who want to dominate them. Right or wrong that is the reality. Accept tt or not is one's choice. It is oneos choice to accept whether animals are better than humans. After all humans are also animals.
Hunger is one reason why they kill. Up the chain they do kill for dominance because that ensures many supplies like food, sex, security, shelter etc. Man also needs all these and if necessary resorts to killing. Living beings have a desire to dominate and this is a undeniable fact. Those who say they do not have have accepted the realty and preach to the contrary. It is a perfectly normal desire but tempered by the fact that man can think and create systems where killing is not necessary. But to create that system killings do take palce right from Ashoka the Great's time till today and shall continue in future also. If groups of persons or even countries are not prepared to kill they fall prey to those who want to dominate them. Right or wrong that is the reality. Accept tt or not is one's choice. It is oneos choice to accept whether animals are better than humans. After all humans are also animals.
I agree with you that animals in most cases kill for as you said in need of food, sex, security, shelter etc but man is the only animal that kills for these as well some absolutely needless reasons. The man kills in the name of religion, expansion, greed and simply for the kick of doing something different.
I love this free image hosting site for sharing my work
But who said a Maoist is not called a terrorist because he is a Hindu? I read many news items saying Maoists killed everyday in encounters. A Terrorist is a terrorist whatever his religion. But if people want to use it for counter attacking purpose, that is something different.
Maoist is not called Hindu terroist even if he is Hindu because he does not raise Hindu slogans and does not fight ofr Hindutva or Hindu Rashtra. similarly, Turkish revolun are not called Muslim terroists even though they are Muslims. Those fighting in name of Islam and so calle Jehad are called Muslim terrorists. similarly, the abhinav Bharat terrorists are xcalled Hindu terrroists. Thus it is not just religion of the terrorist but his purpose and motivation determines whether he is a Hindu terrorist, Muslim terrorist or extreme left terrorist. The link explains well.
You are absolutely right at this point but in case of Muslim Terrorists when they kill Muslims in the name of Islam are still called Islamic Terrorists (Like ISI, Al-Quida etc are doing).
Yes. They are Islamic terrorists because they kill in name of Islam. They can kill even the Muslims who don't follow them blindly.
G. K. Ajmani Tax consultant http://gkajmani-mystraythoughts.blogspot.com/
Those who kill in the name of religion are religious terrorists and those who kill in name of ideology are ideological terrorists. Those who kill animals for sport are called killing for Trophies.
