With whale populations dropping dramatically over the last decades a definite problem has arisen. Nearly all whale species suffered dramatic setbacks in numbers and some lie at the brink of extinction. Although whaling has been part of human society for 5000 years only in the last couple of decades major problems have arisen. It is still not known if some species will ever recover, even after decades of protection. At this moment agreements are being made to counter this devastating process. Whether these talks succeed is not sure however. When taking an ethical look at this case coming to a solution that suits everyone seems to be impossible.
On the one hand there are the hundreds of people who economically live on the whale hunt, hence reaching an agreement is hard to achieve. They need the whales to survive and whole villages would fall apart without it.
On the other hand there is the growing concern that whales face extinction. It is not ethically right to play god over a whole species just for economic profits. It will upset the balance of nature afterwards the hunters face the same economic problems, they cannot hunt whales.
Hence, a moral hard case presents itself. The question what is more important needs to be answered, economic profits or the respect for living being. I believe humans cannot play god and need to respect all other life. The hunters will face the same difficult situation if there are no whales left so there is no good reason to continue hunting whales.
Background article
4 comments:
Clearly it isn’t as simple that whale hunters will stop because the whales are almost extinct. What would you do when you stop hunting wales and don’t have anything else that assures you a steady income, while your neighbor keeps on hunting the last wales and makes some money? Some people cannot afford to stop hunting because there are no good alternatives in their region. I agree that it is morally wrong to hunt a specie until it is extinct but the governments and consumers need to take action to prevent this. The government needs to use law to declare hunting wales illegal, while providing different work for the hunters so they can maintain a steady income. On the other hand the consumers need to stop using and requesting whale ingredients otherwise no one will stop. I am afraid it will only end when it is too late.
ANR 137506
I agree with Ms. Medina: “We can’t stop it; we can try to control it”. From my point of view, this problem must be seen as a normative discourse. One the one hand we as human beings must help everything in the world and especially plants and animals (in this case the whales). From functional perspective, these new agreements are morally right. It provides limited subsistence whaling by indigenous peoples which are be allowed to continue. And on the other hand the whale hunters who live from whale hunting are allowed to hunt on whales but in specific levels. From hermeneutic perspective, not everyone would like these new agreements. In the short run the hunters can’t received a ultra high income, BUT on the long run the whales and new whale hunting generations are saved. If you kill them all now, there is nothing left in the future!
s550209
Comment no. 1 says that it is also the consumers task to prevent whales from getting extinct. I support him in his answer but we also have to stay realistic because I don’t think that people from Korea, China and for example Japan will stop requesting for whale ingredients.
Just like the principal writer I think that governments have to add new regulations. Just like in the king crabs industry. Settle months in which it is allowed to hunt whales, settle geographical areas for the hunters and even discus on which kind of whales to hunt on.
Also providing well paid jobs for after the whale season and/or even try to create jobs which can replace whale hunting will reduce the number of killed whales.
People need to get educated about this problem because some nationalities live from the whale hunt for generations.
Above all, I want to mention about mistake of s580132 about the fact. the student said people from Korea, China will not stop consuming whale. But can you tell me what fact are you based on? On the original post there is nothing about Korea and China. Arguing should be based on the fact.
I think this is a political problem. Because the individual cannot choose alternative, especially the hunter of Whale. If I just look at the problem as two individule group, there is not severe ethical problem. Demand of consumer and hunter who is doing hunting for their living is not immoral. However if we think those two group, government and NGO, we can see big conflict upon them. Their core interests are in conflict and they can change this situation, because they can arrange alternative and at lest other solution for it. So I conclude this is a political problem.
Post a Comment