Trigger words: capable (3) better
Indicator sentences: More capable of... what? What is "better"? Better for whom? Less capable than what?
Negotiation parts: One society develops medicine. The other does not. One is capable of living comfortably longer, which the other lacks. That makes the first more capable. Having something the other does not.
Trigger words: suffering
Indicator sentences: You speak in generalities. Suffering. What is suffering? What specific suffering are you talking about?
Trigger words: capable better
Indicator sentences: Your definition of "better" and "capable" seem a bit circular. What is better and what is capable? How does the capacity to flying make one empirically better?
Negotiation parts: If not empirically, then observably. One culture has something the other does not. In that particular regard, it is better than the other. African culture has Ebola and we do not. So Africa is better? What allows you to determine if what one culture has is better than what the other has? The navi had really big trees so they are better than the humans. They had a cool connection with nature that the humans did not which makes the navi more capable of surviving there. The Navi are also living within their means, and appear to generally be positive for the planet they inhabit (to the point that other animals join to fight alongside them). Earth at this point appears to still require resources to survive that have become rare enough for corporations to wage war with aliens over. At the end of the movie, the Navi as a race are doing fine - but we never really learn how humanity is doing. Is it not entirely within reason that the corporations involved would never return to the Navi's planet, and that it would be humanity who become extinct long before the Navi? Where does this leave the argument about stronger races? Which species is empirically superior when viewed through a timeline of this scope?