A Plan to Eliminate Predators

Alessia Andreotti
August 29th 2014

Should humans intervene and phase out Earth’s predator species? Some futurists think we should! British philosopher David Pearce, in particular, believes we have to stop animals from hunting and killing other animals.
He wrote a Blueprint for a Cruelty-Free World to create a biosphere without suffering. How to achieve this goal? Re-engineering the ecosystem and reprogramming predators through genetically-driven behavioral modification.

“Humans already massively "interfere" with Nature in countless ways ranging from uncontrolled habitat-destruction to captive breeding programs for big cats to ‘rewilding’. Within the next few decades, every cubic meter of the planet will be computationally accessible to surveillance, micro-management and control” Pearce explained in an interview to Io9.

“On current trends, large nonhuman terrestrial vertebrates will be extinct outside our wildlife parks by mid-century. So the question arises. What principle(s) should govern our stewardship of the rest of the living world? How many of the traditional horrors of ‘Nature, red in tooth and claw’ should we promote and perpetuate?

Alternatively, insofar we want to preserve traditional forms of Darwinian life, should we aim for an ethic of compassionate stewardship instead. Cognitively, nonhuman animals are akin to small children. They need caring for as such. Getting rid of predation isn't a matter of moralizing.”

A plan for a world without predators certainly sounds extreme. Are humans allowed to rebuild the biosphere? Is the Earth a garden that humans can landscape at their whim?

Read more at Io9
Picture: National Geographic

Share your thoughts and join the technology debate!


Comments are members only. Login to your account and join the technology debate.

Not a member? Join us

Posted 30/08/2014 – 12:50

Insofar that the price of this "every cubic meter of the planet will be computationally accessible to surveillance, micro-management and control” is massive ecological damage, social instability and mass-extinctions amongst a broad spectrum of animal life this strikes me as more of an attempt to justify the aforementioned by saying "look, but we got rid of natures predators, aren't we great?"

Should men be able to give birth to children?

Koert van Mensvoort: Is the artificial womb frankenstein-like symbol of (male) engineers trying to steal the magical womb from women? Or… is it a feminist project and needed to reach through equality between the sexes? I personally lean towards the latter. To me it feels like progress if a girl can tell a guy to carry the womb for a change.

Join us!
Already a member? Login.