Today was a very challenging day for my ethical believes. I was very disappointed by the laboratory analysis activity, and I hope the proceedings of this exercise will be modified in the future program of this class.
It was indeed very ironical to observe that after spending a semester studying about how humans’ selfish actions damage the ecosystem, how we do not consider nature as we should and why we should modify our way of thinking regarding the environment… we were asked to collect over fifty animals that we abandoned to their fate and let die slowly with no consideration… to eventually get to see the inside of one single shrimp on the microscope.
Wasn’t Aldo Leopold telling us that it is wrong to classify and rank species according to our selfish pyramidal view? Wasn’t he hoping that we could extend our ethical thinking to all species in the future? I was called naïve for hoping that a day like today in which we collect and expose half dead living entities for no proper reason would be forbidden in the future. In that case, how should we call those who considered hundred years ago that women worth less than insects? That a slave has the same value than a furniture? That black colored men could be killed as pleased because they didn’t have the capacity to feel like white men? That a dog worth more than a Jewish whose only sin is to have different religious thinking?
We extended our ethical consideration for women. For slaves. For people with disabilities. For colored people. For dogs and cats. So why should I be naïve in 2016 to consider that collecting living samples for no particular experience sounds wrong…?