ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th October 2017, 04:19 AM   #161
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Theory of Relativity--Special and General.

Do you think they contradict each other?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 04:42 AM   #162
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,754
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Do you think they contradict each other?
Hey, no spoilers! I want to extract the maximum possible amount of entertainment from the inevitable train wreck that's about to happen.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 05:14 AM   #163
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Oh, this should be good. Go on, Kumar, let's hear what you think you're trying to say here.

Dave
Anything can be general or specific relative to circumstances.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 05:23 AM   #164
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Oh, this should be good. Go on, Kumar, let's hear what you think you're trying to say here.

Dave
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Hey, no spoilers! I want to extract the maximum possible amount of entertainment from the inevitable train wreck that's about to happen.

Dave
Exactly what can you tàke.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 05:25 AM   #165
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi View Post
What does this have to do with the rights and wrongs of slaughtering animals for food?
Relative to need and to greed.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 05:27 AM   #166
The Great Zaganza
Master Poster
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,750
I promise not to eat any animals traveling at the speed of light.
__________________
"eventually we will get something done."
- Donald J. Trump
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 05:33 AM   #167
dann
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,218
Originally Posted by fromdownunder View Post
I often wonder if the raw, live oysters I eat occasionally are aware of their fate and either approve or disapprove of being stabbed, dipped in a sauce, and swallowed whole. Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

A few years ago there were Restaurants in Melbourne where there were crayfish swimming around in tanks, and you could specifically pick out the one you wanted for lunch. Did they happily reside in the tank, and know that when Billy Bob was removed, that the cooked version of Billy Bob would be residing in my stomach 30 minutes later?

Somehow I don't think so.

Norm
Unfortunately, I suffer from Billy Bob's Revenge - only; are not a problem. I wonder if this might be due to shellfish being much more vengeful than molluscs, which usually seem to be very docile creatures. I've had Montezuma's Revenge a couple of times, in spite of never eating one single Montezuma, which seems kind of unfair, but at least Montezuma isn't permanent. Billy Bob sure knows how to hold a grudge!
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 05:39 AM   #168
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,754
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I promise not to eat any animals traveling at the speed of light.
I don't think you realise the gravity of the situation.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 06:38 AM   #169
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Both are live beings.
The food chain is composed almost entirely of live beings. That doesn't stop it from being absolutely essential to life on Earth.

Quote:
Human is also animal. Both feel pain. Both should have right to life.
All humans are animals but not all animals are humans. You wish to give to animals the same rights as humans, including to those animals that humans have essentially created by breeding. Are you also in favor of extracting the same responsibilities from those animals as we demand from other humans? You told us earlier that humans were "senior" to other animals. What rights does that status bestow? What responsibility? Why the double standard?

The people whom you've let fill your heads with nonsense are hypocrites. They do not themselves actually respect animals as they want you to believe they do. Are you aware that the vice president of that organization requires insulin for her diabetes, which can only be produced via the captivity and exploitation of animals? Does she nobly die so that those precious animals cannot be used to save her life? No, she makes excuses. The standards these people advocate -- which you ignorantly parrot -- are patently unrealistic. They're based on models of history, biology, and diet that are long on faux morality and short on fact. Those people just want the satisfaction of telling everyone else what to do. But not to do it themselves. Their demonstrated beliefs differ from their pretended beliefs, which effectively dooms their argument -- and yours.

Quote:
Many such.
"Many such" what? What are you talking about?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 06:57 AM   #170
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,453
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Yes, so many different truths.
You would do yourself a favor by arguing only one at a time.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 07:04 AM   #171
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,635
Which one?

The wrong one, or the other wrong one.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 07:08 AM   #172
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
The food chain is composed almost entirely of live beings. That doesn't stop it from being absolutely essential to life on Earth.



All humans are animals but not all animals are humans. You wish to give to animals the same rights as humans, including to those animals that humans have essentially created by breeding. Are you also in favor of extracting the same responsibilities from those animals as we demand from other humans? You told us earlier that humans were "senior" to other animals. What rights does that status bestow? What responsibility? Why the double standard?

The people whom you've let fill your heads with nonsense are hypocrites. They do not themselves actually respect animals as they want you to believe they do. Are you aware that the vice president of that organization requires insulin for her diabetes, which can only be produced via the captivity and exploitation of animals? Does she nobly die so that those precious animals cannot be used to save her life? No, she makes excuses. The standards these people advocate -- which you ignorantly parrot -- are patently unrealistic. They're based on models of history, biology, and diet that are long on faux morality and short on fact. Those people just want the satisfaction of telling everyone else what to do. But not to do it themselves. Their demonstrated beliefs differ from their pretended beliefs, which effectively dooms their argument -- and yours.



"Many such" what? What are you talking about?
Senior people have duty to nurse their juniors not to exploit them. Nature progress from senior to juniors like pareñts nurse their children.

Btw, are you telling that such animals have right to life, no right to enjoy lífe, no right to bring their children and nurse them? Are they ONLY made to serve the humans?
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 07:12 AM   #173
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
You would do yourself a favor by arguing only one at a time.
Truth attract no aurguments in.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 07:14 AM   #174
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,658
Let's make it simple. Kumar, when you see someone choking their chicken what is your innate reaction? Do you think everyone's reaction will be the same?
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 07:18 AM   #175
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,635
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Senior people have duty to nurse their juniors not to exploit them. Nature progress from senior to juniors like pareñts nurse their children.

Btw, are you telling that such animals have right to life, no right to enjoy lífe, no right to bring their children and nurse them? Are they ONLY made to serve the humans?
Animals are not people Kumar, senior or junior.

They will never progress to people, not in our lifetime anyway, although slime mould might be the dominant life form in the distant future.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 07:20 AM   #176
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,635
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Truth attract no aurguments in.
You've been arguing against truth for many years.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:22 AM   #177
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Senior people have duty to nurse their juniors not to exploit them.
Why? Most species of food animal have been created by breeding for just that purpose. Why is Homo sapiens not allowed to benefit from what he made using his superior intelligence?

Quote:
Nature progress from senior to juniors like pareñts nurse their children.
Except that animals aren't my children. You are still stuck in the conflation of animals and humans. There is a difference, whether you choose to respect it or not.

You said you were here to understand. Part of understanding is realizing that you're alleging an equivalence that has no basis in fact. I asked you earlier whether you were willing to relax that allegation in order to advance toward understanding. Clearly you are not, which suggests you are not here to understand but rather to evangelize. That being the case, I think I'll continue to hold your feet to the fire.

Quote:
Btw, are you telling that such animals have right to life, no right to enjoy lífe, no right to bring their children and nurse them? Are they ONLY made to serve the humans?
Essentially yes, but I don't subscribe to your simplification. Some species have been bred especially as food animals. Service to humans results in benefits they would not otherwise enjoy. Humans domesticating animals to serve them is a longstanding historical fact. Again, the people upon whose pretense of morality you're relying know this. Their leaders have no problem keeping animals captive to exploit them for their ability to produce lifesaving drugs for their own benefit. Yet they propose to deny this to others on allegedly moral grounds. You still have not addressed this, and we haven't even gotten to PETA's own animal euthanasia practices.

If you're going to use them as an authority on the ethics of behavior toward animals, shouldn't you at some point explain why even they are unwilling to live within the morals they propose to impose on others? Have you considered that their model of morality is unrealistic? Have you considered that it is not based on facts? If not, then how can you say you're trying to understand? You seem unwilling to look at your own position with a single iota of critical thinking. You seem to be taking a purely moralist's position and chiding others for not being as righteous as you are.

I keep two dogs and two cats. The cats have a responsibility to rid my property of rodents, which can carry disease. They are brothers from the same litter and are 17 years old -- quite a lifespan for the species. They have lasted that long only because I have cared for their injuries, arranged for vaccinations, and prepared food for them when rodentia doesn't present itself in suitable numbers (e.g., during the winter). Thus they live a better life than they would as wild cats, but only because they serve me. One of my dogs is blind. He would not have survived in the wild. The other I acquired with a lame hind leg, which I arranged to have corrected by surgery at my considerable expense. Without my intervention he would have been unable to hunt or defend himself and would have died a miserable or violent death. I care for them because they serve my purposes and for no other reason.

PETA tells me what I'm doing is wrong. They tell me that the animals I keep for my own purposes should be set free to live on their own. I am quite sure that were I to do that, they would live short lives and die violent deaths. I find the protests of radical animal rights activists to be very short-sighted and very selective and rather incompassionate on their face.

Humankind's relationship with these two species -- dogs and cats -- began as symbiosis. Wolves that were tame enough to approach humans were rewarded with food scraps. Humans that were brave enough to tolerate the presence of predator wolves were rewarded by the wolves allegiance in defense and early warning. Millennia of breeding for these traits created a new species. The species Canis familiaris would not exist at all but for H. sapiens' efforts to create them from wolves for their own purposes. Similarly Felis catus arose by selective breeding from small wild cats that were drawn to humans' granaries. Again a symbiotic relationship arose as the cats preyed on the rodents that spoiled the grain. Humans bred in the traits that made them suitable to that task, and cared for them in order that they would survive and serve the purpose for which they had been bred. There's no "nurturing" involved. It's a purely practical project.

Food animals are generally also species or sub-species that would not exist at all without humans and would not continue to exist were humans suddenly to disappear. They currently are born and live in numbers that would be wholly unsustainable without human care, leading to many lives lived that would otherwise not be lived. You seem to look only at the fact that they will be slaughtered (in most cases humanely) and used as food, which is their entire raison d'être despite your romantic delusions otherwise. During their lives they enjoy protection from predators that their cousin species in the wild do not have. they enjoy free access to food that their cousin species in the wild do not have. You gloss over all this symbiosis to arrive only at the notion that they will serve a valuable purpose by dying, and that this is somehow immoral.

Your comically starry-eyed notion of animal agriculture simply has no basis in fact. You're being led along by the nose by people who have no facts on their side, no desire to live according to their own moral judgment, and no sympathy for the consequences of their own misjudgments. You are being deceived by a political group for their own purposes, unaware of how such groups tug at moral heartstrings in order to get advantage they wouldn't have otherwise. They aren't the first or only group to try to shame people into doing what they tell them to do. Animals do not have the same rights as humans because they are not the same species as humans. Ethical treatment of animals is not as laughably simplistic as you're trying to make it, and the people who are telling you to make that way obviously understand privately that it is not.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:26 AM   #178
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,923
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Anything can be general or specific relative to circumstances.
Stick to Einstein and the math. This is not about fake philosophy.......
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:38 AM   #179
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 18,891
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
As told,

Even then, others are slaughtered in front of them, still their behavior seems not change.
Are they still being fed?
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 11:23 AM   #180
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,453
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Truth attract no aurguments in.
And yet you argue on. If not for truth, then for what? Most here would likely chime in more or less in unison that it's for falsehood, ignorance and error, but it might behoove you not to join the chorus.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 12:32 PM   #181
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,407
Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi View Post
Let's make it simple. Kumar, when you see someone choking their chicken what is your innate reaction? Do you think everyone's reaction will be the same?
My reaction would be to tell them to get a room.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 01:34 PM   #182
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,754
Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi View Post
Let's make it simple. Kumar, when you see someone choking their chicken what is your innate reaction? Do you think everyone's reaction will be the same?
Most people don't like to see cruelty to animals. I'd be very unsettled to see someone spanking his monkey in public, for example.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 9th October 2017 at 01:35 PM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 02:23 PM   #183
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,635
Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi View Post
Let's make it simple. Kumar, when you see someone choking their chicken what is your innate reaction? Do you think everyone's reaction will be the same?
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Most people don't like to see cruelty to animals. I'd be very unsettled to see someone spanking his monkey in public, for example.

Dave
That's true, but some people go online to watch a lady smack the pony.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 09:06 PM   #184
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Why? Most species of food animal have been created by breeding for just that purpose. Why is Homo sapiens not allowed to benefit from what he made using his superior intelligence?...
Okay let us compromise. Probably animals who are initially nursed but ultimately slaughtered by human for their use(need, greed or luxury?) are so great that even they sacrifice their life for that nursing but we are so **** that we take their lives and body in return of nursing them. Might is right which is also a rule of nature along with live & let live. So we are natural in doing so. Yes but, it should be natural and need for us. Okay?

It appears personally to me, nature progress as under:

Creation and "Live & Let live"(on plenty & sufficiency) >> Maintenance and "Might is Right" (on deficiency, insufficiency & greed) >> Destruction and "Survival of fittest"(for correcting the odds)>>"Live & Let live". So this cycle go on...


So in view of above, anything can be made justified or rational.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 09:31 PM   #185
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
need, greed or luxury?
Stop moralizing. The people from whom you have taken your moral cues are really no good at it either.

Quote:
...even they sacrifice their life for that nursing...
There's no "sacrifice." You're still stuck in the rut of anthropomorphizing animals. You've shown no evidence of any level of cognition in animals that would support this interpretation. You're just uncritically swallowing the self-serving rhetoric of the radical animal rights advocates.

Quote:
but we are so **** that we take their lives and body in return of nursing them.
You proposed a compromise, but you can't deliver it. You're still just moralizing uncritically. I have asked you repeatedly to examine the moral basis of your argument in light of the behavior of those whose moralityl you have adopted. You have not done so, nor answered the implications of what you propose.

Quote:
So in view of above, anything can be made justified or rational.
No. Just because your personal morality is demonstrably absurd doesn't mean there aren't rational moral bases. Disputing you is not tantamount to anarchy.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 09:57 PM   #186
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Stop moralizing. The people from whom you have taken your moral cues are really no good at it either.



There's no "sacrifice." You're still stuck in the rut of anthropomorphizing animals. You've shown no evidence of any level of cognition in animals that would support this interpretation. You're just uncritically swallowing the self-serving rhetoric of the radical animal rights advocates.
No, I am just discussing our attitude vs other species attitude. We can not say, even who take normal Veg do not practice Violence & other odds. In some sense, it may be more odd.



Quote:
You proposed a compromise, but you can't deliver it. You're still just moralizing uncritically. I have asked you repeatedly to examine the moral basis of your argument in light of the behavior of those whose moralityl you have adopted. You have not done so, nor answered the implications of what you propose.
Should humans not be higher in morality? Are we just following humanity or also morality?



Quote:
No. Just because your personal morality is demonstrably absurd doesn't mean there aren't rational moral bases. Disputing you is not tantamount to anarchy.
Nature, basic need, greed, luxury, truth, rationality, common interest & selfish interest,s etc. can be some consideration for the discussion of this topic. One can say directly which may not attract aurguments that, we need to kill for our nature & basic needs or for otherwise.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:02 PM   #187
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Most people don't like to see cruelty to animals. I'd be very unsettled to see someone spanking his monkey in public, for example.

Dave
Yes, it can be a cruelty, esp if, it is in some selfish interests. From a parent or teacher to their children or student, it may not.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:05 PM   #188
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Are they still being fed?
Yes. They are so great, they even sacrifice their life for small easy feeding and we take it for that small feeding.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:06 PM   #189
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
No, I am just discussing our attitude vs other species attitude.
You beg the question that food animals have an attitude. You seem unable to think of animals without anthropomorphizing them. Why are you so limited in your thinking?

Quote:
Should humans not be higher in morality?
There's a difference between moralizing and morality. You're doing the former, not the latter. You're basing your moral view on what's being taught by a group that is abjectly hypocritical about them. Why do you refuse to take a critical view at your own beliefs and where they come from?

Quote:
...can be some consideration for the discussion of this topic.
Not if you're simply going to project human cognition and emotions onto animals. You proposed a false dilemma between your comically naive moral view and total anarchy. Get rid of that and then someone might want to attempt a rational discussion with you.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:09 PM   #190
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
And yet you argue on. If not for truth, then for what? Most here would likely chime in more or less in unison that it's for falsehood, ignorance and error, but it might behoove you not to join the chorus.
I argue on non A&F part. Truth is real truth when it is A&F. Even a Half truth is often a great lie , like nursing of those animals in OP.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:10 PM   #191
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
they even sacrifice their life for small easy feeding and we take it for that small feeding.
"Small feeding?" You're still being selective and simplistic in how you view the interaction between humans and food animals. Can you get it through your skull that these animals would have no existence whatsoever without humans? Food animals do not "sacrifice their lives." They have no concept of nobility or duty. They are not capable of cognition at that level. You say otherwise but provide no evidence except to state that facts are simply different for you.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:12 PM   #192
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,658
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Yes, it can be a cruelty, esp if, it is in some selfish interests. From a parent or teacher to their children or student, it may not.
An altruistic monkey spanking?
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:16 PM   #193
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
You beg the question that food animals have an attitude. You seem unable to think of animals without anthropomorphizing them. Why are you so limited in your thinking?



There's a difference between moralizing and morality. You're doing the former, not the latter. You're basing your moral view on what's being taught by a group that is abjectly hypocritical about them. Why do you refuse to take a critical view at your own beliefs and where they come from?



Not if you're simply going to project human cognition and emotions onto animals. You proposed a false dilemma between your comically naive moral view and total anarchy. Get rid of that and then someone might want to attempt a rational discussion with you.
ok as you say, in your interests. When I can not be influenced by posters here, how any other ONE SIDED ENTITY can influence me? Just thinking by equanimity. But I know rationality also have value due to phenotype modifications affected due to environmental changes. But however, we should also try to understand about our "natural diet" and need on scarcity. Probably now it is becoming need due to scarcity due to excesses....somewhat might is right is needed for survival of fittest.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:18 PM   #194
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,453
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Yes, it can be a cruelty, esp if, it is in some selfish interests. From a parent or teacher to their children or student, it may not.
I really think you should look up the idiomatic terms being used here, so that when people here pull your leg they don't yank it clean off.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:21 PM   #195
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Yes, it can be a cruelty, esp if, it is in some selfish interests.
I wrote you a fairly lengthy essay on the subject this morning. It briefly surveyed the history of humankind's symbiosis with other species. You obviously didn't read it because you're still taking the one-sided approach that any relationship with animals in which the human is not entirely deferential to the animal is somehow exploitative. So much for your claim to want to understand both sides. As I said before, you're clearly here to moralistically evangelize, only you did no more homework that crib from PETA. You obviously have no idea the pariah that PETA is among actual animal lovers. What will it take for you to critically examine your belief?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 10:29 PM   #196
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,929
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
...how any other ONE SIDED ENTITY can influence me?
I see no evidence that you can be influenced by anything you haven't already decided to believe in.

Quote:
Just thinking by equanimity.
That's your problem. Not only do you seem to consider humans and food animals on equal footing, you're venturing on considering animals to be superior to humans such that it becomes the responsibility of humans to cater to them.

Quote:
But however, we should also try to understand about our "natural diet" and need on scarcity.
The natural diet of Homo sapiens has always included meat, and has for many thousands of years included meat from domesticated food animals. The notions you express to the contrary are purely modern inventions cast from a hypocritical morality. Why do you resist examining the validity of those contrivances?

Quote:
Probably now it is becoming need due to scarcity due to excesses....somewhat might is right is needed for survival of fittest.
You insist on characterizing humans as brutish for breeding animals for food. PETA has brainwashed you into this sort of flagellation, which has no basis in fact and which PETA itself violates on a regular basis. Stop looking to them for moral support. They are not moral people.

Now if you want to talk about a rational food policy, there is much room for discussion. But first you have to shed the concept of animals as noble creatures who knowingly sacrifice themselves for us for food. That's just absurd.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 11:18 PM   #197
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
I see no evidence that you can be influenced by anything you haven't already decided to believe in.



That's your problem. Not only do you seem to consider humans and food animals on equal footing, you're venturing on considering animals to be superior to humans such that it becomes the responsibility of humans to cater to them.



The natural diet of Homo sapiens has always included meat, and has for many thousands of years included meat from domesticated food animals. The notions you express to the contrary are purely modern inventions cast from a hypocritical morality. Why do you resist examining the validity of those contrivances?



You insist on characterizing humans as brutish for breeding animals for food. PETA has brainwashed you into this sort of flagellation, which has no basis in fact and which PETA itself violates on a regular basis. Stop looking to them for moral support. They are not moral people.

Now if you want to talk about a rational food policy, there is much room for discussion. But first you have to shed the concept of animals as noble creatures who knowingly sacrifice themselves for us for food. That's just absurd.
No you perceive or calculate wrong. To me, even regular vegetarian food can also be somehow food by violence--may even be more in some sense. True food with non violence & cruelty can just be what nature offer with a purpose. May it be fallen fruits, milk from happy cows/animals somewhat like mother milk, minerals, honey droplets, nector, dead beings(?) etc.

I just want to know, why nature has not evolved us with hunting & eating tools(like hunter animals lion etc.)? Why we need to cook meat?
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th October 2017, 11:39 PM   #198
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,308
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
I just want to know, why nature has not evolved us with hunting & eating tools(like hunter animals lion etc.)?

It has, they just aren't the same as the ones lions have.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2017, 12:40 AM   #199
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,712
Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi View Post
Let's make it simple. Kumar, when you see someone choking their chicken what is your innate reaction? Do you think everyone's reaction will be the same?
Should be, if all are ínnate like me.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2017, 12:46 AM   #200
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,658
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Should be, if all are ínnate like me.
What?
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:09 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.