The movie, The Kestrel's Eye, was not what I expected it to be. Even though the title signals what the movie is about, I figured there would be conversation, not just the view of the world from the bird's perspective. It never really occurred to me that the view of a bird is totally different from us. They soar through the sky and can see for miles on end. One part that really stuck out to me in the movie was when the bird spotted its prey. At that moment, the bird darted to the ground. I thought this was neat because even though the bird was high in the sky, the sighting of prey was undefined.
After reading Emily's post, I completely agree with what she has to say. In the movie, there were occurrances where they bird was eating another animal, in one instance a mouse. The kestrel was surviving by hunting down its prey for food. This ties in with the ideas presented in The Green Halo. It is considered "unjust" when a human eats meat because the animals have "feelings and can suffer." I never really thought about the fact that animals have to survive too and they do this by "CONSUMING" other animals. If animals have to eat other animals to survive, then why is it so morally wrong for humans to do the same?
One of the philosophers mentioned by Kohak in The Green Halo is Schweitzer. His major accomplishment to ecological ethics is his reverence for life. The basic commandment of this is "It is good to protect and love life, it is wrong to destroy and wound life." In relation to the movie, I think that this quote is somewhat diminished. Survival of the fittest is the means of the world today and the strongest survive. Although it is good to protect and love life, it is also a means of survival. Animals are a food source for humans, and not only humans, but also to other animals as evidenced by the movie, The Kestrel's Eye.
No comments:
Post a Comment