Last edited by Beautiful sky; 07-27-2010 at 12:46 AM.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Whats the point in asking whether or not animals have rights when it seems pretty clear that rights don't exist any more than the ten commandments.
I'll just assume the question is whether or not we should give animals the same treatment as people. In that case, we should probably do whatever is beneficial to do. Unless it would be beneficial to do otherwise, generally we shouldn't let animals go extinct. Beyond that, there's no reason to go out of our way to make animals suffer, but unless it will affect your sleep, we should do whatever will make life easiest. Pain is the price for life. Of course the consequence of this is that if enough believe that animals should have "rights" for whatever reason, then we should grant it to them. It wouldn't be beneficial to contradict the majority. Obviously not to the whole, and in most cases not to the individual.