And then the sentence later I said 'Ohh' and replied to it.
No, you replied to the one after it.
The way you're posting is making the discussion needlessly confusing. You just have floating replies and sometimes it's hard to tell what they're in response too.
And now I just literally found out how to quote.
Condemning my bias and using your own is hypocrtical.
I'm not using my own, I'm admitting it. And my choice to eat meat has nothing to do with the discussion. It's context for me admitting that I'm being selfish by eating meat. So the practice of eat meat is selfish, a luxury food item that isn't necessary for survival.
You didn't admit it until literally just now. Congratulations, hypocrite. Took you awhile.
What piece of inconsequential piece of information?
That I'm against animal cruelty, it kind of makes a good 2 thirds of your previous post moot.
No, you THINK you're against animal cruelty.
What's that son, calling someone a cowardly hypocrite pisses them off enough to make them say rude things? I would have never guessed!
You've been doing it since before I called you a coward.
I haven't called you a coward.
Born to be murdered in an outdated practice.
By that logic then the meat industry is an outdated practice. Which contradicts everything you've said thus far.
Meat is relevant to society. Fur isn't. Outdated, just like type writers.
That sounds really pleasant. If there is reincarnation (and I'm sure there isn't) then you deserve nothing less than being skinned for that argument.
More evidence of it being fortuitous that you're not in a position of power.
'Last person in the fucking world that should say that, hon'.
Prove it, I've got rationale for all my arguments, you've yet to make a compelling argument against one.
The fact that you have to tell your self you've got good arguments proves otherwise.
You want an argument on morality do you?
This entire argument has been about morality. Where the fuck have you been?
Same self deprecating bullshit every misanthrope touts.
Then I guess it's a good thing I'm not a misanthrope. My point is once you start arguing the morality of something you're instantly going to fall flat on your ass because your existence alone causes a lot of immoral suffering. It's hypocritical.
Without humans there would be no context. Things would just happen because they happen. Our ability to contextualize is what makes us special.
How's this for context; you'll die. It doesn't matter what meaning you give your life or what context you give your actions. You're going to die in a mess of your own filth. Try and find some beautiful context for me there, please. We live in a bubble of abstract ideas and shallow diversions. I hardly think that justifies all the suffering we bring.
Not just functions, but functions better.
Depends on your definition of better, if pure chaos is your definition of better. Then yea.
Society is pure chaos. At least in this world without humans there'd be no pollution, population problems, over fishing, and slaughter. Animals have the opportunity to at least 'try' and live. we strip that away from them, and this is morally abhorrent.
We don't have humans introducing foreign animals to places they shouldn't be.
That's a relatively minor concern and ecosystems recover quite quickly from such things in most cases.
Tell that to all the Australians.
Or the fantastic stuff we do either.
That's not an argument. You wanted morality so here it is; the terrible things we do greatly out weigh the good things. A few 'fanastical' things being lost would hardly be a big price to pay.
Then by your own admission fur doesn't matter.
Nihilist. Or so I consider my self to be one. I don't believe anything matters. But in spite of that I'm still against causing needless suffering. We're all going to be dead eventually, but that doesn't stop me from wanting to live a life without an incredible amount of suffering. I believe in ending suffering if only because of the privilege I have, and because it wouldn't feel right for me to say that other creatures should suffer something I'd be unwilling to.
Sure morality changes depending on society, but so does everything. I'm not seeing how that's an argument.
That's my entire fucking argument against fur. We're changing and we're past fur. It's no longer relevant, meat is. Let it die.
And by your logic you'd have been fine and dandy with that. After all, you wouldn't want to argue against something that was socially relevant.
I probably wouldn't even know I was gay due to the incredible amount of stigma against it. If I were to speak out against it, I'd be set on fire. It wouldn't matter if I was the greatest psychologist in the world; people will believe in whatever they want to. Trying to push for gay rights would fail, badly, with me being burned at a stake. People are only willing to make a change for the better when society is willing.
Our own personal morality dictates all of our actions.
True
But my life will have been.
Sleep. Eat. Fuck. Yup, so different. The only difference is that humans like to romanticize everything with a bunch of bull shit.
Entertainment, spiritual enrichment, questions for the sake of questions, discovery, exploration, testing our limits and our desire to take everything apart just to see how it works.
Let me translate everything you just said. Shallow distractions, abstract bull shit, pretension, and two things that animals can do, but to a lesser degree. Oh, and last time I checked most people aren't making discoveries, exploring, and taking things apart. Animals are always testing their limits. It's called living.
The fact that we understand a concept such as value makes it so.
I'll file that under the 'abstract bull shit' cabinet.
Ohhhh, so dark and edgy. It's not like I read that on every awkward kids myspace page's "about me" section like 6 years ago.
I'm not trying to be dark and edgy. I'm trying to say that value is nothing but an abstract idea that isn't worth anything outside of humanities little bubble that's made completely out of bull shit.
Entirely debatable.
Without human life what would this world be? Pure chaos without an ounce of culture, history or direction.
Ohhhh, so dark and edgy. It's not like I read that on every awkward kids myspace page's "about me" section like 6 years ago.
Remember when you said that not too long ago? Well, funny because you sound exactly one of those atheist humanists who go on about science and humanity, as if they're extraordinary spiritual experiences. Okay, Thunderfoot. Want to show us clips of how beautiful life is while you monologue about how amazing and spiritual science is?
You see, that's the problem I have with humanity. We're like a mentally handicapped child looking at a glass of colored water, assuming that just because it's colored that it's something more than water, that it somehow has more meaning. Even with no religion, people try to be spiritual. It's sad really. George Carlin said it best. Society is built around bull shit. Not too much, but just enough.
And as far as I'm concerned, the humans have brought far greater chaos than animals ever will. It's true that you need to fear for your life every second as an animal. but us humans, holy fucking shit, now that's chaos.
We have guys running into theaters shooting people. We have wars. We have bombs. We have missiles. We have riots. We have all these people walking around, driving cars, taking planes, taking trains. We've got Laws, crimes, businesses, charities. Can you please tell me again about this 'pure chaos'.
Culture and history doesn't give our lives any more meaning. They're merely distractions. I love history and it's a good thing to consider, but I'm not going to pretend it gives our lives meaning nor value. The world would definitely be different without humans. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's just something that's unknown to us. So perhaps you're just scared.
No, you're just being nihilistic and self deprecating.
What are you? 12?
Missed the point. We're in no place to argue what is and isn't moral with all the amount of suffering we cause. That's the point. Or does my notion that you're not too important hurt your feelings?
All morality is subjective, that's the point.
Then your entire argument has been meaningless.
Sounds just about right.
And all the great things we bring too.
A fair price to pay.
Which wouldn't have the faintest notion of how things had changed anyway. Except the billions of animals that now depend on us for their survival because of domestication. They'd probably have a gay old time trying to reintegrate into the wild.
They'd integrate, regardless. Having a city destroyed by a war doesn't stop people from rebuilding it.
Because I'm against suffering.