Kill an insect just for...

There is a moral ugliness! I can't see how some aunt on the street sees a caterpillar immediately crushes it with her foot, and in the wake of it, her children do the same. So to speak, in the image and likeness. Maybe my parents raised me wrong somehow? It makes me cringe. And my child will never do that.

Even though I'm a hydrobiologist, my hand automatically reaches for the camera on my side when I encounter something 6-8-legged (it's a pity, it's not always in place).

The same applies to other cases, for example, pick a flower on a walk in the woods and throw it on the road; pick a mushroom without picking mushrooms. I once saw a grandmother feeding pigeons and watching her granddaughter (granddaughter!!!)with emotion shooting pigeons with a child's air pistol.
If a ground beetle crawls or a caterpillar - you need to crush
it If a butterfly flies - you need to catch it, wipe its wings and wonder why it can't fly after that.
If a bronze fly flies, you need to catch it and put it in a jar, where it will slowly die
If there is an anthill on the way , you need to stir it up, observing the commotion in an orderly and perfectly organized community (or even burn it - such idiots also occur)

The problem is in education - from an early age, the child needs to instill a careful attitude to nature. I will not say the loud phrase "live in harmony with nature". It is enough just not to interfere in someone else's world.

Ah, a sore subject was raised. I remember once (as a child) resting in a sanatorium, and was fond of all sorts of caterpillars. And somehow I managed to "infect" the hpv caterpillars, Even some grandfather from somewhere brought a caterpillar of a pine hawk moth and asked what to do with it and where to release it (I found it on the highway during the "settlement period")...
But usually, on the contrary, I see this hostility to insects and nature in general. Perhaps it's a matter of ignorance and misunderstanding? They would have shown microcosm more often, and there would have been less of it.
In Astrakhan, I often explained to the villagers who mantises are. That these are not" nasty pests that eat everything in a row", but useful and very charming insects. And often the attitude was changed, especially with a visual demonstration

The habit of ordinary people to divide all living things into "useful" and "harmful" is generally annoying. And there's nothing you can do about it. Yes, ordinary people, in a number of pseudoscientific publications, mustache-ragievs are considered pests of the forest! In my opinion, in the consciousness (if it can be called consciousness) of most people, it is firmly established that everything crawling and fluttering is pests. And that's why they push right and left in passing, sincerely considering it a valor. Once on the street, my interlocutor, who was aware of my passion, but did not share it himself, continued to talk to me, and with a slight movement of his foot, in passing, crushed a Carabus nemoralis crawling on the asphalt. In response to my indignation, he only replied:" I don't need to tell you about it, I've ruined so many beetles myself! " It was simply useless to explain anything to him.

Once I found a heavyset elderly citizen engaged in a strange activity - furiously trampling fly agarics. To my classic question: "Why are you doing this?" - he replied that " Because you can't eat them!" When I next asked him why he didn't trample on the grass, which also doesn't seem to be eaten, and doesn't kick obviously inedible rocks, he looked at me with bloodshot eyes with dull bewilderment and stopped trampling on the fly agarics. I left. I wonder what thoughts went through his mind at that moment.

I'm afraid he thought you were inedible, too."..

Do you remember how Grishkovets in" How I ate a Dog " talked about the service on Russian Island? There was a phrase about a swallowtail (Maaka), which they were told not to kill. "I killed three!!!" Somehow I missed it, but this year a friend of mine (a molecular biologist), when he saw this swallowtail, said that he had a burning desire to catch and tear off its wings. I was puzzled, but there was no rational answer. Everything is at the level of children's instincts. Or the instincts of some citizens who catch accidentally flying beetles on electric trains and do not throw them out of the window, but press them with their foot. I see this as a form of moral ugliness, but I don't find much understanding among my colleagues (they are either molecular biologists or hydrobiologists).

There are freaks. In order to understand their motivation, you need to be the same or close to it. A normal person will not be able to feel (empathize) with such a deformity.

I'm a moral freak and a pervert who used to shoot frogs when I was a kid. And not so long ago I killed a bunch of snails (I wanted to cook them first, but then I forgot about them and they turned out to be rotten). And sometimes I tear the leaves, but not intentionally, but as if by the way.. All this is due to a lack of awareness and brains at the right time. So I'm the worst here

I have a meeting with something 6-8-legged hand automatically reaches for the camera on its side (it's a pity, it's not always in place).

Similarly

As a child, I used to kill vipers for nothing - "because I was a snake." And frogs and other grasshoppers-not to count... Apparently, it is somewhere in the subconscious sits, the implementation of internal aggression. There is no rational explanation for these senseless murders.

Oh, how white and fluffy we all are... One Ripper is not good. And all the others have never in their lives crushed cockroaches/woodlice/spiders/etc. (please underline). And they collect butterfly beetles exclusively for the sake of high science. But, for some reason, the antennae-legs-wings strive to preserve, although they are not particularly important for science, but they are important from an aesthetic and / or commercial point of view. And very morally kill a series of insects to build some statistical series of changes in the color of the species XXX-probably, this is a particularly valuable scientific result, which is of great national economic importance. And no one goes fishing or hunting, except for food... And we don't drive a car, because thousands of innocent insects die on the windshield in one trip... And who can remind me how many of the biblical "who is without sin and the first to throw a stone" were there? And it turns out that most of the participants in the discussion are hypocritical, and the topic is worthless and it was not necessary to start it. Do not judge, and you will not be judged.

PS. With all this, I also don't like it when a caterpillar or beetle is casually crushed, Alas, but everyone lives according to their own moral law, and the general one applies (and then conditionally) only to individuals of their own species.

PPS. All of this is strictly IMHO. I didn't want to offend anyone and probably shouldn't have interfered.

mikee
Kill aimlessly-that's the question. Russia has no more than 10 thousand people who are somehow connected with entomology (including amateurs). But there are still 130 million ordinary citizens.... Now in Primorye, they are fighting the meadow moth. It is necessary, but they spray insecticides in the meadows surrounding the fields. For one such raid, more insects are killed than all entomologists in Russia in a year. Well, or the classic that was immortalized in "Don't shoot wild swans": they doused an anthill with gasoline and set it on fire. It is unlikely that an expert on ants will kill so many individuals in his entire life.

You will laugh, just like that, deliberately, with nothing to do, you have never crushed anyone. Cockroaches, yes, happened, but spiders and woodlice were not crushed on purpose.

You will laugh, just like that, deliberately, with nothing to do, you have never crushed anyone. Cockroaches, yes, happened, but spiders and woodlice were not crushed on purpose.

Even as a child?
Indeed, in childhood we are all sinful. I remember myself throwing ground beetles into the fire. But I think it's unconscious .

This post was edited by rpanin - 05.09.2008 10: 59

Well yeah I just wasn't interested. I really, then, apparently, tried to collect a collection, and I put some insects in cans, they died, and I pecked the corpses in cardboard boxes - I was then 6 or 7 years old. I tried to determine by "Animal Life":) I consider my biggest sadistic sin to be tearing off the legs of haymakers: I pinned them as they twitched. But not all of them, but one or two. And then I'd ask my grandfather if he'd grow those legs back. But just like that, just to stupidly destroy an unknown insect with a kick-no, it never happened.

Here I also did not push, even as a child (except for flies and cockroaches). And my friends poured paraffin on anthills.

Well, I think that most people in childhood tear off the wings of flies and legs of spiders. This is an experiment, an element of knowledge. And I think this is normal.
But to make an adult person want to nail a swallowtail or tear off its wings... it's a total nightmare. It's just something I've never encountered before. But I had to communicate with people who are VERY afraid of various arthropods and beat them just incalculably. It's sad, of course, but it's hard to convince such people.
to omar: and you don't need to push the woodlice, they need to be collected

I also made fun of the Colorado Potato beetles, I'm a sinner.
The haymaker has no particular horror in tearing off children's legs. The question is different: will he break off a couple of haymakers and go mad, or will he move on to another stage-consciously causing harm to the living.
Crush a caterpillar on the road-in general, the ground for psychological research. Either this is the venting of accumulated aggression on a deliberately weaker object due to some complexes, or an obsessive state.
Who knows?

This post was edited by Morozzz - 05.09.2008 12: 04

The question is different: will he break off a couple of haymakers and go mad, or will he move on to another stage-consciously causing harm to the living.
Crush a caterpillar on the road-in general, the ground for psychological research. Either this is the venting of accumulated aggression on a deliberately weaker object due to some complexes, or an obsessive state.
Who knows?

First, there must be a psychological change, after which a person begins to realize some kind of involvement in the suffering of another living organism. Well, before this change in the village in the summer, I threw colorads into the fire, watched with lively childish interest how they hissed and bubbled there, and then, with the pleasure of an experimenter, pulled out copies of the same beetles from the fire, although they already consisted of ashes. Well, it was a sacred thing to crush them on the stucco foundation of the house. Brr... Even somehow it's getting unpleasant now.

As for the caterpillars, this is not an obsessive state as such, it is still, so to speak, a psychomotor replacement, projecting one's aggression, resentment, and frustration from unsuccessful love onto an object suitable for this, provided that it is safe for the perpetrator. For example, an example like this: at my nekastrirovanny cat of months in 8 poperli hormones, and really poperli and he started looking for the object of mating. And who is the most pleasant person to be with? With something that brings pleasure. That's right, a human hand, I always stroke it. And with the next stroke (read: in sexual frustration), he was gripping my wrist with his teeth in a death grip and giving my elbow a tra... Well, in general, it was difficult to unhook it later, poor thing. Neuter it is necessary...

So, comrades: if someone has problems with uncontrolled aggression, buy yourself pears and gloves and beat her until she loses her pulse. Better yet, go swing in the gym. So men: beetles are beetles, but we need to have muscles. Damn zaofftopil, well, God be with him.

About the Colorado potato beetles complex is not necessary-they do not have a soul. Just like ants, I think.

About the Colorado potato beetles complex is not necessary-they do not have a soul. Just like ants, I think.

Yes, not in the soul of the matter. It's just pathetic. You understand that a pest, but it's still a pity, a living creature after all.

Well, I think that most people in childhood tear off the wings of flies and legs of spiders. This is an experiment, an element of knowledge. And I think this is normal.

In fact, it strongly depends on the parents whether the child will do such things. I know from my own experience. Children are not stupid, they can learn early to empathize and project other people's feelings on themselves, but many parents do not bother with this. The main thing is that the child is always full, dry, pretty, does not cry, And without tears they do not become a person...

And Grishkovets... Juglans, were you disappointed by these words of his? That's probably all it was meant to be. Such a seemingly cute lyrical hero (even if with elements of an autobiography), and suddenly... That, they say, is what a good person gets down to in such an environment.

Vorona
I was disappointed in Grishkovets even earlier (not as a writer, but as a person). It's not even about him or the kids. You can also recall the lines from the song of B. G., who called for suffocating butterflies. A swallowtail is not a fly. It's still something beautiful. Why an adult should kill him is unclear. I have seen children in Beijing use nets to catch beautiful dragonflies and cicadas and then let them go (and there is no special education there – it's just the way it's done).

If "so accepted" - this is education. A system of values, moral principles, and all that. Children who caught and released butterflies as adults remember how great it was, and they will show their children this beauty.

The fact is that the Chinese are absolutely alien to sentimentality towards animals. They sell live chickens painted in different colors for children: they are played with for a couple of weeks, and then thrown in the trash with food waste. A purely practical approach, including to insects.

The Chinese managed to let some of their comrades from the opposition party "on organs", as I once saw in a TV program. And you say chickens... Although cruelty and sadism start with a caterpillar, chicken, cat, and so on. ascending order.

It really depends 99% on your upbringing. We have always had animals in our family - cats, dogs, fish. My mother says that when she kills a fly with a fly swatter, she always hopes that it will fly away in time. But such education is not beneficial from a social point of view. The person must be aggressive.

Unmotivated aggression is not beneficial to anyone: neither to society (a person is still a social creature), nor even to the individual himself - in the end, he will run into a cooler individual and get it, while a sane friend will live longer (unless he gets caught by an aggressive person at the wrong time).
Only me, it seems, is already blowing offtop

You will laugh, just like that, deliberately, with nothing to do, you have never crushed anyone. Cockroaches, yes, happened, but spiders and woodlice were not crushed on purpose.

I won't laugh. Whether you believe me or not is a personal matter. But even in my early childhood, let alone at an older age, I never pushed anyone. Accidentally flew into the apartment wasps and so on. caught and released. I never killed frogs (of course, without taking into account the laboratory ones when studying at the biofactory faculty), on the contrary, I fought with my peers (and of course I was beaten by them), trying to prevent them from shooting at frogs with slingshots, throwing stones. I'm only guilty of one thing - ruining and ruining beetles, collecting a collection.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 06.09.2008 21: 30

It really depends 99% on your upbringing. We have always had animals in our family - cats, dogs, fish. My mother says that when she kills a fly with a fly swatter, she always hopes that it will fly away in time. But such education is not beneficial from a social point of view. The person must be aggressive.

25-40% depends on upbringing, the rest is innate!
It is not necessary to develop the topic - because this is another topic that has nothing to do with entomology.

This post was edited by rpanin - 06.09.2008 21: 44

mikee
Kill aimlessly-that's the question. Russia has no more than 10 thousand people who are somehow connected with entomology (including amateurs). But there are still 130 million ordinary citizens.... Now in Primorye, they are fighting the meadow moth. It is necessary, but they spray insecticides in the meadows surrounding the fields. For one such raid, more insects are killed than all entomologists in Russia in a year. Well, or the classic that was immortalized in "Don't shoot wild swans": they doused an anthill with gasoline and set it on fire. It is unlikely that an expert on ants will kill so many individuals in his entire life.

Nda, and in that year, in general, all the forests were treated,and they said that it was safe.And in the forest, even the birds died.And this year the butterflies are much smaller than usual.So trust the assurances.
I feel sorry for them. I wonder how many forests they saved, even killing birds.

a friend of mine (a molecular biologist) saw this swallowtail and said that he had a burning desire to catch it and tear off its wings. I was puzzled, but there was no rational answer. Everything is at the level of children's instincts. I see this as a form of moral ugliness, but I don't find much understanding among my colleagues (they are either molecular biologists or hydrobiologists).

For a quarter of a century of work in the field of so-called molecular biology, including 15 years in laboratories in such dissimilar countries as Norway, the United States, and Thailand, I did not come across such people (and often went out into nature).
And yet, I remember as a child my friend's mother (a physiologist by profession) when I was visiting them at the dacha secretly released from the jar collected by me (with great importance) and still alive beetles. It was very frustrating at the time, but now I understand it better.
It was no longer as a child that I probably killed more than a hundred mice alone to collect material (which resulted in writing a dissertation), and this is unpleasant for me to remember.

This post was edited by amara - 07.09.2008 10: 38

And they collect butterfly beetles exclusively for the sake of high science. But, for some reason, the antennae-legs-wings strive to preserve, although they are not particularly important for science, but they are important from an aesthetic and / or commercial point of view.

That's right. I agree.

thanks to all participants of this topic!

I've never had the satisfaction of killing animals. Except for killing the Colorado Potato beetle in the most sophisticated ways. Firebox, threw it in gasoline and set it on fire, built wooden houses and set it on fire. Well, this attitude I have only to the wildebeest. I can only crush fleas and ticks in self-defense. And understand the people who push for fun !?When I was a teenager, I looked out from the 7th floor of my house and saw a strange picture below. The children are hitting something on a rock, I don't know how, but I could see that they were hitting a lizard on the head with a rock. Enraged, I ran outside and kicked the poor animal on the head, but it was too late. At school, when they tortured lizards, I bought them for money. I collect some insects in series and seemingly kill insects by the hundreds, but if a spider or some other small thing crawls into the house, I always take it and throw it out the window (although it would be easier to pin it down). Even collecting insects didn't work out for me the first time. After seeing the suffering of cabbage patch and soldier boy, I couldn't go any further. Then, when I saw what the collections looked like, I overcame myself. And I try to make everything that I zamarivayu it lived on with its life, whether it's my collection or just another type of collection. And the fact that people are pushing or they have an irresistible desire to watch the torments of defenseless animals. So it's called in 2 words-moral freaks. It doesn't depend on your upbringing. This is the hidden inner world of a person, which with growth a person can either hide or develop further in his ugliness. Well, or try to enter the framework of sociality. I doubt that children who crushed animals in their childhood and were happy about it will grow up normal, as they are not brought up.

Trofim, you know, among psychologists there are only 2 explanations for any features of human character: either innate or from upbringing. Well, for the life of me, I can't imagine being "innate pleasure in watching torment" or "innate cruelty." Innate can be features of temperament (phlegmatic-choleric), mental features (genius, abilities-disabilities). The rest is brought up. Maybe you mean that sometimes a person grows up ugly, even though he was advised only good things? So this is explained by the fact that education is not only and not so much reading notations, but more your own example and the correct behavior of parents.

I've never had the satisfaction of killing animals. Except for killing the Colorado Potato beetle in the most sophisticated ways. Firebox, threw it in gasoline and set it on fire, built wooden houses and set it on fire.

I haven't even been able to get my hands on the Colorado Potato beetles lately.

I now don't collect any collections at all - I've switched to the photo. Yes, you can't pick up a needle with an insect in it, you can't turn it around under binoculars, but this is more humane and more acceptable for me.