Since we do not know how animals experience pain, we have to as sume that animals feel the same pain we would under identical circumstances. That is the bottom limit of my ethics. In that sense, nature is permanently pointing us toward our responsibilities. Still, you cannot escape violating these ethics, even if only to survive. Native Americans used to ask their prey animals for forgiveness. Western man has invented original sin for this would like to tell some thing about my relationship with my dog Nouscha now This relationship has shown me that her logic is different from mine. She only knows the logical connective and. She unequivocally links one event to another But they must be events that are important to her, and the link must be made in a few seconds i on the other hand think tha there is a law of cause and effect, which is a typically human product. In fact, there is no cause and effect in nature. Everything is as it is. My dog knows"this better than i do, and that is often the cause of misunderstandings between us. She maintains the sober and consistent philosophy that you have to take things as they come People usually don t do this, and that is the main cause of their suffering. That is why they invented religion, to make this suffering acceptable. People have an option to suffer. For people, suffering can become a Passion. Animal don t have such freedom. They cannot choose one option and not the other. We have chosen to associate with animals in a way that is beneficia to us. Animals haven t chosen this association and do not benefit from it in any way. that makes us responsible. We should take thi responsibility seriously by gaining knowledge about the animals, trying to find out what their interests are and by looking after them as best we can. This means we have to put ourselves in the animals position animals cannot put themselves in our position. In that sense our relationship with animals will always be asymmetrical. We have to give and in principle animals dont have to give us back anything. Our problem is that humanity as a species has become so successful, that it s starting to work against us. Space on this planet has become limited and nature is forced back more and more It seems like a nice option to drive back animals into separate areas, but it wont work at all. In the same way, western man thought to confine native americans and the aboriginal in reservations, where they could supposedly preserve their own culture. But we dont know enough about their needs to do justice to every species of animalor plant life. We are not capable of repeating evolution in a short time. The only solution is forSince we do not know how animals experience pain, we have to assume that animals feel the same pain we would under identical circumstances. That is the bottom limit of my ethics. In that sense, nature is permanently pointing us toward our responsibilities. Still, you cannot escape violating these ethics, even if only to survive. Native Americans used to ask their prey animals for forgiveness. Western man has invented original sin for this. I would like to tell something about my relationship with my dog Nouscha now. This "relationship" has shown me that her logic is different from mine. She only knows the logical connective "and". She unequivocally links one event to another. But they must be events that are important to her, and the link must be made in a few seconds. I on the other hand think that there is a law of cause and effect, which is a typically human product. In fact, there is no cause and effect in nature. Everything is as it is. My dog "knows" this better than I do, and that is often the cause of misunderstandings between us. She maintains the sober and consistent philosophy that you have to take things as they come. People usually don't do this, and that is the main cause of their suffering. That is why they invented religion, to make this suffering acceptable. People have an option to suffer. For people, suffering can become a Passion. Animals don't have such freedom. They cannot choose one option and not the other. We have chosen to "associate" with animals in a way that is beneficial to us. Animals haven't chosen this association, and do not benefit from it in any way. That makes us responsible. We should take this responsibility seriously by gaining knowledge about the animals, trying to find out what their interests are and by looking after them as best we can. This means we have to put ourselves in the animal's position; animals cannot put themselves in our position. In that sense our relationship with animals will always be asymmetrical. We have to "give" and in principle animals don't have to give us back anything. Our problem is that humanity as a species has become so successful, that it's starting to work against us. Space on this planet has become limited, and nature is forced back more and more. It seems like a nice option to drive back animals into separate areas, but it won't work at all. In the same way, western man thought to confine native Americans and the aboriginal in reservations, where they could supposedly "preserve their own culture". But we don't know enough about their needs to do justice to every species of animalor plant life. We are not capable of repeating evolution in a short time. The only solution is for man to step