Putting a wild animal in a cage isn't "boredom", its torture.

> Now biological evolution is complete because it is displaced by the evolution of civilization

That's not a true statement.

>Why do animals have to suffer in wild nature now?

Because animals ARE wild/ARE Nature. You can't remove nature from nature.

>allowing animals to live in the wild will be considered a crime (like living children unattended).

This is... absurd... Animals are not pets, animals ARE wild, they are dangerous. They are also required for life on this planet to continue. The ecosystem depends on animals at all levels of the energy/food web for it to exist and continue and screwing with this on that level would largely ensure the collapse of the worlds ecosystems.

Then what about meerkats as pets, for example?

> Because animals ARE wild/ARE Nature. You can't remove nature from nature.

Who say this to you? It was God, animals themselves or some voice of Universe? There is no one here, only us. We can do what we think is right. If we see suffering that has no any purpose, we can stop it. What is "purpose" is just our choice too.

> They are also required for life on this planet to continue.

For what? Now we are life on the planet. Nature has evolved and we are the result and next step.

>The ecosystem depends on animals at all levels ..

Now we have a new ecology: mankind and Earth.

What about it?

>Who say this to you? It was God, animals themselves or some voice of Universe?

This is what I learned by studying biology and ecology

>There is no one here, only us. We can do what we think is right.

You're suggesting interrupting a natural ecosystem that is beyond complex, likely leading to its complete collapse, due to lack of understanding.

You may "think" you're right, but anthropogenic projection and a complete lack of understanding of how the world works doesn't make your view right, if anything your an example of someone with good intentions that would utterly fuck up the world if you were given control

>If we see suffering that has no any purpose, we can stop it. What is "purpose" is just our choice too.

Suffering is a natural state of existence, we all experience it, it's part of life, many philosophers would argue a necessary part of life.

>For what? Now we are life on the planet. Nature has evolved and we are the result and next step.

We rely on a massively complex ecosystem made up of millions of other living organisms. We are not "the life", we are an example of it on this plane.

Nature is continuing to evolve, we're just one point on a long line of changes.

>Now we have a new ecology: mankind and Earth.

That is absurd and unjustifiable. Earth's ecosystem is made up of billions and billions of living things, humans are just one part of it, and one of the most damaging, destructive, short-sighted living things and we cause significantly more suffering than anything else.

I would suggest starting with biology and ecology courses, and some history both geological and human.

No.We did not understand each other. I'm talking about what we will do when we completely destroy this ecosystem. May be it will take about hundred years.

> Suffering is a natural state of existence..

Then why do we worry about animals in zoos? We are part of nature too. Then why do we separate natural and non-natural suffering?

> Nature is continuing to evolve, we're just one point on a long line of changes.

Wild nature has no time for this. Evolution requires millions of years. We will destroy it before anyway. And even if we disappear and let it to evolve farther, then for what? It has produced conscious cpecies already.

> Earth's ecosystem is made up of billions and billions of living things, humans are just one part of it.

Ok. Another point of view: what do you think about the anthropic principle?

I think you equate humans with animals. But that is absurd, because it is the judgment of man. Animal cannot judge at all. You separate nature and mankind and then say that it just part of nature. I do'n understand a point.

> I would suggest starting with biology and ecology courses, and some history both geological and human.

I think I studied it at school 30 years ago :). Last years I finished with quantum mechanics and switched to English language (sorry, the hardest subject for me).