I never1) called you a hypocrite.
2) mentioned mud huts
3) mentioned grass
I did, however, explain rather succinctly (admittedly in a rather facetious way) 2 ways in which vegans do NOT act, but which, if they stick to the literal interpretation of their convictions they should.
So, again, how do you reach the conclusion that I am a hypocrite? Because I live in a country under a government that I didn't vote for?
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 15:49,
archived)
2) mentioned mud huts
3) mentioned grass
I did, however, explain rather succinctly (admittedly in a rather facetious way) 2 ways in which vegans do NOT act, but which, if they stick to the literal interpretation of their convictions they should.
So, again, how do you reach the conclusion that I am a hypocrite? Because I live in a country under a government that I didn't vote for?
okay thenI wont call my self a vegan because some of the stuff I use has far away links to the meat industry.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 15:55,
archived)
Does using animal dung or their exhaled CO2 exploit the animals?Touchy buggers, aren't they.
(
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:05,
archived)
The Vegan Society defines veganism in this way:'The word "veganism" denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and practical — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.'
Exhaled CO2 and animal dung are derived from Animals.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:10,
archived)
Exhaled CO2 and animal dung are derived from Animals.
So presumably then people who use the remnants of a compost toilet for fertilising are cannibals.See also: the tweed industry which did, and possibly still does, use urine for fixing.
The exploitative bastards
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:12,
archived)
The exploitative bastards
No, becauseCanibalism is eating the meat of your own species directly.
Whereas, Vegans are not supposed to use products derived in whole or in part, whether directly OR indirectly.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:17,
archived)
Whereas, Vegans are not supposed to use products derived in whole or in part, whether directly OR indirectly.
Still human exploitation though according to the logic that manure and fossil fuels is animal exploitation."way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and practical — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose"
The logic is that buying animals products ultimately promotes the intensive farming and mistreatment of animals, so therefore they opt out. Using a product that was created by natural deaths millions of years before the person was even born is hardly in the same spirit of things.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:27,
archived)
The logic is that buying animals products ultimately promotes the intensive farming and mistreatment of animals, so therefore they opt out. Using a product that was created by natural deaths millions of years before the person was even born is hardly in the same spirit of things.
Jesus H CorbettSo, do you just go ahead and disect humour, or kill it first?
(
Skirite Gerrorf my larnd,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:59,
archived)
Ok, they have been rather careless with the last sentence.But I think it is just carelessness, rather than overriding their earlier statement where they say they're only against products exploiting or harming animals.
( my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:14,
archived)
Ulitmately my objection to Veganism runs as follows:If you accept that humans have rights because of some percieved moral value, it is surely unacceptable not to ascribe the same rights to all animals (since there is no way you can say an animals life is worth less than a humans, without having made some arbitrary decision).
Therefore, "Meat Is Murder".
Fine so far? (I know I've just disproved my point... but only from the point of view of a pre-existing moral framework.)
So, now, let use examine what 'rights' really are:
All 'rights' (human, animal, or otherwise) are an illusion perpetuated by the mass consensus of society.
You may wish to say "God tells us this..." or "science/sociology says this..." and use some sort of logic to justify the rights that you believe in. However, when it comes down to it, rights either DO NOT EXIST at all, or they are formed from the weight of consensus.
In the first case (rights do not exist), veganism is therefore shown to be irrelevant (along with all forms of religion, etc).
In the second case, veganism is wrong (as most of society do not support it).
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:34,
archived)
Therefore, "Meat Is Murder".
Fine so far? (I know I've just disproved my point... but only from the point of view of a pre-existing moral framework.)
So, now, let use examine what 'rights' really are:
All 'rights' (human, animal, or otherwise) are an illusion perpetuated by the mass consensus of society.
You may wish to say "God tells us this..." or "science/sociology says this..." and use some sort of logic to justify the rights that you believe in. However, when it comes down to it, rights either DO NOT EXIST at all, or they are formed from the weight of consensus.
In the first case (rights do not exist), veganism is therefore shown to be irrelevant (along with all forms of religion, etc).
In the second case, veganism is wrong (as most of society do not support it).
Yes but you could apply that line of reasoning to any right which had in the past been non-existant, but now is unthinkably vital.And to anything people are still very ropey about like actually supporting the homeless, poor, wartorn, and giving people decent free health care.
That's not so much an objection to Veganism, that's an objection to people.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:40,
archived)
That's not so much an objection to Veganism, that's an objection to people.
Yes... it is a very general, anrachistic, line of reasoning...Yes... it could be applied to a lot of things...
However Veganism is not "unthinkably vital". General consensus has not reached the point where its momentum forces changes in animal rights legislation.
It hasn't even reached that point for the homeless, poor and sick.
So, no its not a specific objection to Veganism. Its an objection to people wasting their (and others) time with a belief system that is fundamentally at odds with the nature of the world.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:47,
archived)
However Veganism is not "unthinkably vital". General consensus has not reached the point where its momentum forces changes in animal rights legislation.
It hasn't even reached that point for the homeless, poor and sick.
So, no its not a specific objection to Veganism. Its an objection to people wasting their (and others) time with a belief system that is fundamentally at odds with the nature of the world.
So how exactly does the momentum change,given that there's no point or reason in believing anything that goes against the mainstream?
( my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:50,
archived)
I suppose the momentum changes,Because some people are not capable of going with the flow, and seek to change things.
Things changes.
Slowly.
Meantime, there are a bunch of people enjoying themselves, and not paying too much attention to the moralistic positions of those who aren't.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:10,
archived)
Things changes.
Slowly.
Meantime, there are a bunch of people enjoying themselves, and not paying too much attention to the moralistic positions of those who aren't.
I'm sure they're enjoying themselves too.Presumably they get more enjoyment from abiding by their moral view of the world than they would from eating a bit of meat now and then, otherwise they wouldn't do it.
I'm guessing there have been some changes you like, such as free health care and equality. But you'd still argue against the people who went against the mainstream to fight to instigate them?
(I'm guessing there have been some changes you like, such as free health care and equality. But you'd still argue against the people who went against the mainstream to fight to instigate them?
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:15,
archived)
Yes I would.Equality is another horrible illusion. I'm all for advancement based on utilitarian merit, not on some arbitrary government declaration.
Eg. If some total tard gets a job instead of me, because targets for racial equality need to be met, I would consider that to be a disgrace.
Free health care I'm not fussed either way about. Ultimately, its probably a lot more efficient for health to operate in the private sector, but I respect the utilitarian arguments in favour of public health, as the health of a countries economy is directly linked to the health of its populous.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:22,
archived)
Eg. If some total tard gets a job instead of me, because targets for racial equality need to be met, I would consider that to be a disgrace.
Free health care I'm not fussed either way about. Ultimately, its probably a lot more efficient for health to operate in the private sector, but I respect the utilitarian arguments in favour of public health, as the health of a countries economy is directly linked to the health of its populous.
I said equality, not positive discrimination.But the government does sometimes get confused between the two.
I am a little confused as to why you're arguing for the stagnation of mankind.
(I am a little confused as to why you're arguing for the stagnation of mankind.
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:26,
archived)
I'm not arguing for it.......more arguing for its inevitability!
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:30,
archived)
Other belief systems have been at odds with the nature of the world and have been largely accepted now, or at least more so than nothing as they were before.For a start you have to believe there's such a thing as a 'nature of the world', which while any misanthrope will tell you is a harsh unchangable and self destructive place, is ultimately an incredibly complex system which can alter radically from inane and tiny things.
The major problem is that with the development of the human race the size of groups that people are capable of cooperating with has not increased at the same rate as the global population has, though to abandon or criticise any attempts to years from now overcome or rectify this is ultimately just jaded.
Presuming you're an athiest then you are realistically just wasting your time between your birth and death, whether you hope or feel you have achieved anything is irrelevent and all the time you have spent will be eradicated and meaningless when you die.
So then why not blow the top of your head off instead of wasting time on something which will achieve nothing?
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:58,
archived)
The major problem is that with the development of the human race the size of groups that people are capable of cooperating with has not increased at the same rate as the global population has, though to abandon or criticise any attempts to years from now overcome or rectify this is ultimately just jaded.
Presuming you're an athiest then you are realistically just wasting your time between your birth and death, whether you hope or feel you have achieved anything is irrelevent and all the time you have spent will be eradicated and meaningless when you die.
So then why not blow the top of your head off instead of wasting time on something which will achieve nothing?
Are you saying all Atheists should kill themselves? Dude.Yes... everyone is wasting their time between birth and death.
I guess it all really depends on whether you wish to waste that time getting uppity on behalf of a bunch of creatures that couldn't and wouldn't thankyou for it (even if they knew about it and were capable of understanding), or whether you instead choose to waste that time by enjoying eating said creatures.
The reason I haven't committed suicide is simple; it doesn't sound like much fun. Ultimately, the passage of time throughout my life might be insignificant and meaningless in the grand scheme of the universe, but whilst I am enduring it, I may aswell enjoy what I can.
I guess I just don't understand the mindset of anyone who would prefer to spend that time doing unenjoyable thankless stuff, only for it to turn out to be just as insignificant and meaningless as the life of someone who had a hell of a lot of fun.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:09,
archived)
I guess it all really depends on whether you wish to waste that time getting uppity on behalf of a bunch of creatures that couldn't and wouldn't thankyou for it (even if they knew about it and were capable of understanding), or whether you instead choose to waste that time by enjoying eating said creatures.
The reason I haven't committed suicide is simple; it doesn't sound like much fun. Ultimately, the passage of time throughout my life might be insignificant and meaningless in the grand scheme of the universe, but whilst I am enduring it, I may aswell enjoy what I can.
I guess I just don't understand the mindset of anyone who would prefer to spend that time doing unenjoyable thankless stuff, only for it to turn out to be just as insignificant and meaningless as the life of someone who had a hell of a lot of fun.
Well why not fight for some potentially futile cause? It's ultimately still meaningless as everything else.And while you may seem enthralled by transient physical enjoyment, that's just your brain pumped full of chemicals I couldn't even name telling the fragile human psychological profile that things are good. Doesn't mean shit all.
If you want to take individual human perception and psychology as a given rather than take the bleak path, then you can't really argue they are living pointlessly because it obviously gives them a great deal of pleasure and fulfillment. In which case it can't be said to be more of a waste of time than enjoying yourself on the path of least resistance because ultimately none of these mean anything when it comes to life and death, but they can both still make the person feel like they have come to terms with and lived whatever concept of life they have. And if personal experience is what matters then their choice of life is no more or less meaningless.
QED
N.B. Suicide isn't meant to be fun, but what good is fun when you're dead anyway, just a way of cutting out the middleman.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:23,
archived)
If you want to take individual human perception and psychology as a given rather than take the bleak path, then you can't really argue they are living pointlessly because it obviously gives them a great deal of pleasure and fulfillment. In which case it can't be said to be more of a waste of time than enjoying yourself on the path of least resistance because ultimately none of these mean anything when it comes to life and death, but they can both still make the person feel like they have come to terms with and lived whatever concept of life they have. And if personal experience is what matters then their choice of life is no more or less meaningless.
QED
N.B. Suicide isn't meant to be fun, but what good is fun when you're dead anyway, just a way of cutting out the middleman.
You make a very good case sir!And a nice little flourish of latin at the end!
Yes, I do enjoy transient physical enjoyment. But since all things are transient, and all enjoyment is based upon the physical interactions of brain chemicals, what other kind of enjoyment is there?
You're right tho - there is nothing more or less meaningless in veganism than in anything else. I'll concede that.
=D
Who's saying I'm dead anyway? I might be an nihilistic anarchist, but I'm very much alive and enjoying myself!
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:44,
archived)
Yes, I do enjoy transient physical enjoyment. But since all things are transient, and all enjoyment is based upon the physical interactions of brain chemicals, what other kind of enjoyment is there?
You're right tho - there is nothing more or less meaningless in veganism than in anything else. I'll concede that.
=D
Who's saying I'm dead anyway? I might be an nihilistic anarchist, but I'm very much alive and enjoying myself!
The human race is not a homogenous mass,we don't all have the same moral values or attribute rights to things in the same way.
What is the problem with someone calling themselves a vegan and deciding that according to their moral views, harm to animals to should be minimised?
Yes, the weight on consensus forms the framework of 'rights' in a legal sense, but while we have to follow them, we don't have to agree with them and they aren't intrinsically 'right' and other views 'wrong'
(What is the problem with someone calling themselves a vegan and deciding that according to their moral views, harm to animals to should be minimised?
Yes, the weight on consensus forms the framework of 'rights' in a legal sense, but while we have to follow them, we don't have to agree with them and they aren't intrinsically 'right' and other views 'wrong'
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:41,
archived)
Any particular part? my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 16:44,
archived)
You sure showed me my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:09,
archived)
Theres nothing "wrong" with it, I suppose.It just isn't right.
And, in addition, its a hell of a lot of hassle.
I follow the path of minimal resistance, and veganism DEFINATELY isn't it.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:16,
archived)
And, in addition, its a hell of a lot of hassle.
I follow the path of minimal resistance, and veganism DEFINATELY isn't it.
Of course, no set of morals is 'right'.I do a number of things that aren't the path of least resistance, for example cooking rather than buying ready meals, or holding the door open for someone.
Do you honestly assess every choice according to what would be the quickest and easiest way?
(Do you honestly assess every choice according to what would be the quickest and easiest way?
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:20,
archived)
Path of least resistance...Is not merely choosing the quickest and easiest option directly ahead of you.
It is choosing the quickest and easiest SET of options, looking ahead as much as is possible and relevant.
You cook, as you are looking ahead to some point in the future, where having had a more nutritious meal, or more cash in your pocket, will benefit you. Or indeed, the greater level of satisfaction obtained from the meal will relax you, leaving you better rested later on down the path.
You hold the door open, as you will be percieved as polite and attentive, being as you are aware that people who just barge on through end up looking like tosspots.
OMG. I've done sod all work today. I think I'm gonna have to leave this debate (its kind of at a deadlock anyway), but I very much enjoyed it!
Incidentally. Any of the arguments I have put forth are not necessarily my opinion, and are subject to change at any time. For further details, please see my signature.
(,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:30,
archived)
It is choosing the quickest and easiest SET of options, looking ahead as much as is possible and relevant.
You cook, as you are looking ahead to some point in the future, where having had a more nutritious meal, or more cash in your pocket, will benefit you. Or indeed, the greater level of satisfaction obtained from the meal will relax you, leaving you better rested later on down the path.
You hold the door open, as you will be percieved as polite and attentive, being as you are aware that people who just barge on through end up looking like tosspots.
OMG. I've done sod all work today. I think I'm gonna have to leave this debate (its kind of at a deadlock anyway), but I very much enjoyed it!
Incidentally. Any of the arguments I have put forth are not necessarily my opinion, and are subject to change at any time. For further details, please see my signature.
And veganism is explained in exactly the same way, as the followers derive pleasure from itand perhaps from the idea that their views may become more mainstream.
But yes, this was thoroughly enjoyable.
(But yes, this was thoroughly enjoyable.
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Tue 7 Apr 2009, 17:32,
archived)