Life In Captivity

Okay, well, I was doing this project on primates and part of it was to research several species and their habits, locations, lifespans, etc. I came across something that intruiged me. For almost any primate you research at any credible website, they give two lifespans: the wild and in captivity. Life in captivity is usually 10 to 20 years longer than life in the wild.

I also noticed that chimpanzees can live up to 30 or 40 years in the wild. And I remembered this one thing from Viva Rock Vegas where a carnival man is shouting "A 40 year old man! Come see this medical marvel" etc. And I remembered that people used to die at 60. That not so long ago, 40 was indeed considered old. Most people started their lives at 20 then. No one does now; you can have a kid when you're 35 because you'll live to be 90.

And so as I often do, I drew a strange parallel. Primates live much longer in captivity than in the wild. Are we, are humans, living in captivity? One could say yes. We are bound by rules and restrictions. We are kept out of harm's way, with approved foods and vaccines.

Have our homes become cages? One could argue no. Because we have freedom. We still cause enough destruction. And who is controlling us? Yet, one could argue that we are being controlled by society and by the government. IT's interesting and its an argument that could go on for hours.

So let's start.

In a sense we are living in captivity, but it's a captivity we have created, and therefore it's really just our natural habitat.

There is no straight answer for this really.

I think this question is somewhat difficult to answer for the world as a whole. Some places are a much more strict environment than others. I mean, look at what regulations were like in the communist-soviet society compared to somewhere like England or the US at the time. In a sense they're both regulated, and in a way the people living there are captives; not always by choice.

However, when you look at some of the rural areas of Africa, they are pretty much living "in the wild". And their lifespan reflects that. They don't have access to all the vaccines and medicines we do.

You know, I wish we still had the best topic award. Not just for this topic, but you pretty much make the most interestings threads in this whole forum.

Lol @ Kurtni.

...Now I've forgotten what I was going to say.

Oh yeah, uh first of all, look at life expectancy in seperate regions. I've studied geography for such a long time, I know too much about social geography. Anyway, Botswana, life expectancy there is about 35 years of age to 40, at most. This is of course due to HIV/AIDS. This is a recurring pattern for meny developing countries in Africa and Asia particularly. Then the HIV/AIDS thing is linked to lack of female emancipation and education in these countries.

It also just so happens to be that GDP per capita and national annual gross is the lowest in these countries than the rest of the world. Material possesion means very little to those living in the worst poverty in the most under-developed countries. If your idea about humans living in captivity is comparible to wild animals, then why are these people suffering?

Humans have long abandonned our natural behaviour for more civilised etiquette which is useful for basing a society on, but rubbish for when your country's infrastructure goes to he dogs.There are only a handful of people nowadays who are truely wild, unaffected by modern civilisation and these people though they are a dying breed, they are living life to it's fullest even if it means that they only live for thirty years or so.

Yes of course we're all technically living in captivity, but it was a sacrifice we were willing to make in order to live orderly.

Also, this is an interesting place to bring in mandatory euthenasia.

Mandatory euthenasia as a topic...not like to suddenly kill everyone on ths thread.

I need to come back to this topic when I have time. It's fascinating. [/offtopic]

Anji:

Mandatory euthenasia as a topic...not like to suddenly kill everyone on ths thread.

I love how we have to specify that

What do you mean by mandatory euthanasia? (sorry, I'm not particularly well informed on this...)

It does seem to depend from civilization to civilization. But it doesn't. Because from a certain angle, it looks like we're all in cages. Singapore is a beautiful city. It has greenery, tropical weather, shopping malls. It has industries and provides housing and low-cost groceries to all citizens. It is culturally diverse. Not only is it a beautiful island, its a fine city. Because you can't do anything without getting fined for it. They banned chewing gum. They banned mosquitoes (not that I'm complaining).

Everything is expensive. A Gap shirt in Singapore can cost around $50 USD. So while its beautiful and nice, there's a lot of restriction for the sake of maintining the infratructure and health.

And now look at India. There's practically no restriction on anything! People, honestly, do whatever the hell they feel like. There's even a joke: America is the most free country in the world. The only country that is more so is India. Yet you look at society and people are opressed because some do exactly as they please. As a modern nation, we're young but there's thousands of years of restrictions to keep us down. And restrictions don't even come in the form of laws. Dowry, for example. It's illegal but sometimes parents save up their entire lives so they can get their daughter married.

So that's like...two ends of the spectrum in Asia. One completely modernized, westernized, and in the spotlight and the other developing and fighting internally. And in different senses, the people of both countries are in captivity.

anti-christ of suburbia:

What do you mean by mandatory euthanasia? (sorry, I'm not particularly well informed on this...)

Well, there appears to be a new way of approaching pension problems and health care expenses and over-priced old folks homes. Very radical, often very provocative, basically you reach a certain age, live 75 let's say, and the government kills ya, to put it in short.

Like, you know what euthanasia is, well this is mandatory. This way, less taxings is spent on the healthcare system, pensions, all the resources needed to supply the elderly and there is more money for those who will have more time to live anyway.

There are blatant advantages and disadvatages but many people choose to oppose it simply because it's unethnical. Inhumane.

O___O They do that?! Like "Happy Birthday Granny! Time to die!" ???

Of course it's not done, but it's a very radical idea for over-populated countries which are usually socialist. It's suiting with their beliefs, I guess, but you'd see loads of old folks packing up right before they turn 70 or something.