For all living creatures. A truly advanced civilization would be able to to positively impact the environment and lives of every creature they encounter.
We will genetically engineer all pathogens so that instead of killing us they give us super power boosts until our immune system takes care of them. That way we don’t murder the pathogens like we do now.
I’d read this.
Hm… What would biopunk but in a utopia instead of a dystopia be called? 🤔
Idk about all creatures. Wouldn’t that disrupt the food chain too much?
Won’t someone think of the amoebas??
This is true utopia.
If you want to positively impact the live of Corona, HIV, etc. you are going to have a bad time. This is essentially the same as the paradox of tolerance.
Colloquially, we usually dont refer to microbes as creatures even though they are.
A truly advanced society would function as a altruistic socialist society, where there would be no need for money, and thus for-profit insurances or healthcare systems. People, animals and per extension nature would be cared for, keeping the balance and living symbiotically. We would help each other without expecting anything in return because we know we, in our own turn, would be cared for.
I know… That would be the day huh
Yes I’ve seen Pokemon
I wonder what kind of healthcare the humans have in that world, actually. For all I know, they take better care of the pokemon than they do the people.
Universal healthcare for animals yes. A truly advanced civilisation would find the ownership of an animal by another (a pet) abhorrent. Animals are rational beings and have their own will, therefore we have a moral duty to care for them and not exploit them or keep them captive.
I had a guy remodeling my bathroom who said it was wrong to own a cat because you make the cat stay in the house at night and it might want to be at the club instead.
It is wrong that way, but the cat also likes food, warmth, and companionship.
What would the cat choose? I tried: The cat went outside many times a day for hours at a time. Brought back some dead mice, birds, a squirrel, a rabbit, and fight wounds on himself. What did the victims think, and how to weigh their opinion in the pet equation?
The counterargument to this is that it’s not wrong to make good choices for those who cannot make them themselves.
A truly advanced civilization wouldn’t keep pets, though it would care for animals by preserving their habitats
The trouble is getting them to pay taxes
If they’re truly advanced, they don’t need taxes.
The employer pays the tax: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45155818
Now we just have to get them to get jobs
I’m with you.
The animals in our lives don’t just benefit the individual, they benefit everyone. So, even if you aren’t behind the idea because we should take care of each other as a moral or ethical thing, it’s also a practical matter.
So, treat it like having green spaces in cities, national wilderness, public schools. We make sure that people can have animals in their lives without money being a factor. Remember, we’re talking an advanced world here, so scarcity is minimized, and people aren’t becoming vets with income as their underlying necessity to survive. They’ll have housing and food no matter what, so they can practice out of nothing but the desire to help critters.
But, even now, we ought to have a charity that helps with such things. That way emergencies and difficult to treat issues aren’t an automatic monetary decision, it can be about making the best choices for the animals. Even if it was limited to people that would otherwise be separated from animals, it would still be an improvement to the humans’ lives, the animals’ lives, and thus everyone’s lives.
Seriously, if you have never seen how much good comes from just the disabled having an animal companion, it wouldn’t even need thought. And, when an animal ends up being rehomed because of money issues, how much it effects the animal’s happiness and well being it stacks the benefits higher. I’ve taken in critters when my patients couldn’t afford them, including when they needed medical care as part of why it wasn’t affordable. The animals, at least the ones that tend to bond with humans, were miserable for months in some cases, longer in others.
But if there had been an organization to make sure the critters got to appointments, had the right foods, etc, I wouldn’t have needed to take them in, they could have stayed with their people and been happier as well as healthier.
We should do better by the animals in our lives as a culture, as a society. And not to do so while whining about the poor and elderly and disabled not deserving that experience because of money alone. Even if we can’t make it happen for everyone, making it happen for some is better than nothing.
some sorta started doing it but considering how much of the globe do not do it for humans we have pretty far to go.
