Schweitezer: Great idea though not scientifically just

Albert Schweitzer is extremely enthusiastic about the preservation of life; however he is blind to fact that Earth cannot be a utopia. He states that it is “good to maintain and cherish life, but evil to manipulate and destroy it.” Humans, in his eyes, are destructive and care of no other beings’ existence aside from their own. Unfortunately since Schweitzer isn’t a biologist, he tends not to see the purpose of the existence of a species. A species sole design is to exploit its resources while hindering the spread of other species in an attempt to become more prolific than their competitors. Since each organism is maximizing their reproductive success while at the same time developing defenses to counter the thwarting attempt imposed by other species, a utopia is unachievable in the biological sense. However this does not mean that humans must fall into the same category and destroy everything. Instead, humans should remain neutral and strive not to exploit animals while at the same time not interfering with natural processes.
Schweitzer states that he has “become a persecutor of the little mouse which inhabits my dwelling, a destroyer of the insects which desire to breed there, no less a wholesale murderer of the bacteria which may endanger my life.” Here we see Schweitzer feeling compassionate about these mice that humans have made seem vile. In all actuality it is mice that carry more bacteria as a whole (mainly in their defecation) than insects. Mice can produce far more offspring to become problematic than most pestilent species of insects. Also, it is unheard of for insects to damage the infrastructure of the house, with the exception of termites. Mice and rats however are not opposed to chewing wall board, severing electrical wire or attacking the house’s inhabitants. It is with all this in mind that I think as good as Albert Schweitzer’s intentions are, they are unrealistic and not supported by scientific data.