The Veg*nism Thread

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

It means they're stupid, TONGO. You know what stupid is, right?

Yes, and I know that applies to the educated too.

Stupid would be more like that bird that didnt have the sense to stay still and heal. Fish dont have a registerable intelligence.
I also know a saying, insanity is trying the same thing but expecting a different result. Keep on doing your thing Omni

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

I also know a saying, insanity is trying the same thing but expecting a different result. Keep on doing your thing Omni

Well, at least we're agreed I'm insane, I keep using appeals to reason and reason clearly isn't something you value. My mistake.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

Well, at least we're agreed I'm insane, I keep using appeals to reason and reason clearly isn't something you value. My mistake.

No thats exactly what I respond to but you were too impatient fron the word Go. I actually picked up more from what you were saying when you responded to Sean. I wasnt coming into the thread to bug you, or make an ass out of myself by not knowing a fish was an animal (still think animals as land dwellers but whatever), but agreeing vegetarianism is the best diet. We differ when it comes to eating fish. Ill just read along, and Im sorry it got needlessly heated.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

I said at the beginning of the thread, "your positions are likely to be challenged so you'd best be prepared to defend them calmly and with mutual regard for intellectual honesty."

I suggest you re-examine my arguments, in particular, the pages I linked to in them. They explain the issues with your arguments.

Moving The Goalposts is a logical fallacy and you're committing it by first asserting that fish cannot be intelligent, but then when provided evidence that they are intelligent, you "move the goalposts" by redefining what you mean by intelligence. If that was acceptable then we could undermine any claim.

Likewise, In-Group Bias is untenable, while Reductio Ad Absurdum is the means by which we arrive at countless certitudes.

Consider it this way:

Crash tests are a literal form of Reductio Ad Absurdum.

Manufacturers don't merely assert that "this is a safe car", they consider the evidence and posit a design that they hypothesize would maximize passenger survivability.

Then they test it by pushing their assertion to the extreme, in this case, forcing a car into a head-on collision at average speeds. From this they can conclude whether their assertion about how safe the car was holds true or not.

The "desert island scenario" as I described is a metaphorical example of the same principal, it seeks to determine inconsistencies in the rationale that proposed it. That's what I was doing when I asked you about eating babies. You consider it an extreme and that's the point: does what you assert to be "ethical" hold up under those circumstances?

If not, why not? How can we make this car safer?

Last edited by Omnizoa; 08-22-16 at 01:16 PM.

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

I said at the beginning of the thread, "your positions are likely to be challenged so you'd best be prepared to defend them calmly and with mutual regard for intellectual honesty."

Yes but the words you choose to downgrade someone or their argument doesnt produce a calm discussion. Respect, its a two way street, and no OP can disempower that necessity in true communication.

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

Moving The Goalposts is a logical fallacy and you're committing it by first asserting that fish cannot be intelligent, but then when provided evidence that they are intelligent, you "move the goalposts" by redefining what you mean by intelligence. If that was acceptable then we could undermine any claim.

No I havent Moved The Goalpost, Im firm on stating fish dont have a registerable intelligence, or even register pain. Your example of a hand without food in it put over a fish tank where fish swim up to. A plant will grow towards where there is sunlight. Its life. Life goes towards what sustains it. That doesnt prove though that the fish or the plant has registerable intelligence.

Never use rape, baby kicking, or any ridiculous assertion that such acts fall in line with whoever youre arguing against as their ethical stance or beliefs. Certainly isnt condusive to a calm discussion. Please dont retort that at least, Im trying to give you a headsup.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

It changes it's behavior through repeated stimulus, that's called learning. Plants don't do that, plants don't have brains.

Originally Posted by TONGO

Never use rape, baby kicking, or any ridiculous assertion that such acts fall in line with whoever youre arguing against as their ethical stance or beliefs. Certainly isnt condusive to a calm discussion. Please dont retort that at least, Im trying to give you a headsup.

I suppose car crashes are ridiculous as well. I mean we can't discuss that calmly, we're completely incapable of that. Let's talk about something nicer, like a car... bumping into a curb or something, we can test how safe the car is that way.

I refuse to change my arguments because they don't make you feel warm and fuzzy, TONGO. The truth sucks sometimes, stop taking it personally.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Addendum: The reason I use examples like rape and baby kicking is because nobody disagrees that they're wrong. The point then is to determine what exactly about those things is absolutely wrong and show that the specific reasons we have to be against those things (concern for others' well-being) isn't consistently applied.

There's a double standard.

I'm not accusing anyone of the equivalent of rape, I'm identifying a problem with their critical faculties that could excuse rape.

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

No, its degrees.

Youre respective of life but are you a murderer for fishing, cleaning, and eating a fish? No. Sensationalizing produces horrid examples, and stunts your own progress when you use them. Also can come across as strawman.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

No, its degrees.

Youre respective of life but are you a murderer for fishing, cleaning, and eating a fish? No. Its a horrid example, and stunts your own progress when you use it.

Why?

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

Why?

Registerable intelligence. Otherwise if its just "life itself" youre a murderer for killing a plant by uprooting and eating it.

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

or are you asking why does it stunt your progress in a conversation? Most people would become offended and tune you out.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

Registerable intelligence.

Why?

If that's all that matters then it's okay to eat humans while they're sleeping.

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

Why?

If that's all that matters then it's okay to eat humans while they're sleeping.

Im sure the human would have a problem with that

Ill say this - If I threw out my castnet, and brought up a bunch of sleeping humans, I wouldnt eat them

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

Im sure the human would have a problem with that

Ill say this - If I threw out my castnet, and brought up a bunch of sleeping humans, I wouldnt eat them

Why?

Let's get to the bottom of this, TONGO.

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

Why?

Let's get to the bottom of this, TONGO.

You think after literally tens of thousands of years that fish if indicitave of comprehension, memory, or communication would learn to stop biting hooks or swimming near the waters surface where a net could entrap them.

Theres a difference, there are degrees, sleeping humans arent fish.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

I'm well aware of that, TONGO, but you've avoided the question.

You wouldn't eat sleeping humans. Why?

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

I'm well aware of that, TONGO, but you've avoided the question.

You wouldn't eat sleeping humans. Why?

Omni, I comprehend what you think I cant, but you wont even consider you are wrong in judging those that eat fish. They are equally respective of life.

Omnizoa

Hullo

08-22-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

Omni, I comprehend what you think I cant, but you wont even consider you are wrong in judging those that eat fish. They are equally respective of life.

You're still not answering the question.

Why won't you eat sleeping humans, TONGO?
What is unethical about eating sleeping humans?

TONGO

Unregistered User

08-22-16

Originally Posted by Omnizoa

You're still not answering the question.

Why won't you eat sleeping humans, TONGO?
What is unethical about eating sleeping humans?

Ive a feeling Im wasting my time. Im not a murderer i.e. life ender of the intelligent. Also not a cannibal. There are other reasons.

Omnizoa