Treating people like animals is only bad because you’re arbitrarily presupposing that animals are worthy of lesser treatment. You do understand that, right?
And like, what’s your well-reasoned moral philosophical justification as to why it’s okay to kill sentient beings that don’t want to be killed, and why does it distinguish between humans and other animals???
What a solipsistic take. By the same token, there’s no way that you can prove to me that you understand personal mortality. If, for the sake of argument, I were to point a loaded firearm at you and you were to attack me, attempt to flee, beg for your life, whatever, there’s no way you could prove to me that your actions are motivated by a subjective will to not die: for all I know you might just be acting very convincingly like someone who understands mortality without actually having any interiority whatsoever.
However, there is social utility in assuming that others are capable of understanding abstract concepts when they perform actions in accordance with such an understanding. And from the fact that most animals will try to avoid things that they can reasonably understand will cause them death (natural predators, environmental hazards, anything that has caused them injury), we can likewise extrapolate that they don’t want to die.
> Puts a bullet in you
> bystanders freaking out
> not to worry, I have the perfect justification prepared
> “Oh nonono it’s ok, they just don’t have any sort of consciousness. it’s not solipsism. it commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com behavioural study.”
> nailedit.jpg
i never suggested they don’t have consciousness, though i rather doubt that some animals, like muscles, do. i said they don’t understand personal mortality. if you can find me an animal cognitive behaviorist who disagrees, i’d love to read their work.
In the sense that they both have a drive for self-preservation that I believe ought to be respected where no immediate threat to wellbeing exists, yes actually, I would treat a whale like a lion and simply not murder either of them for food. In fact, in my everyday life, I do treat them exactly the same because I have exactly zero interactions with either.
It’s almost as though you’re completely disregarding the context and the scope of my previous response because you’re arguing in bad faith.
Yes, I can accept that different things are different and this will sometimes mean that it’s okay to accordingly act differently, but sometimes different things have similarities and you’re here arguing for discriminatory treatment in the context where they’re actually not that different. Whales, lions, sheep and humans alike have a drive for self-preservation. Thus, they should similarly be allowed to live without being killed in cold blood by those who are capable of knowing better than to inflict needless suffering.
I have stated my reasoning again and again. It is on you to provide a justification for the discrepancy you’re here supporting.
there is no reason to suppose eating animals is bad. since it is so normal, both among humans and in the natural world, the burden is on those who propose that we don’t do that.
I’m really glad I made a PieFed instance, because it means I get to ban people like you who obstinately push realist authoritarian points that were rebutted several messages ago, like you’re on some kind of script for exhausting the enemy. MULTIVERSE’s rule about limited authoritarianism is something I’m really proud of in how it specifically bans these kinds of tactics which are optimised to exhaust and/or intimidate the left wing opposition.
I mean I know you by reputation, I’ve seen you do this kind of thing before. But I still gave you the benefit of the doubt today, and it’s making this tankie ban feel just so much more satisfying.
the Holocaust was bad, in part, because it treated people like animals. his opinion isn’t well reasoned moral philosophy.
Treating people like animals is only bad because you’re arbitrarily presupposing that animals are worthy of lesser treatment. You do understand that, right?
And like, what’s your well-reasoned moral philosophical justification as to why it’s okay to kill sentient beings that don’t want to be killed, and why does it distinguish between humans and other animals???
there isn’t proof nonhuman animals understand personal mortality.
What a solipsistic take. By the same token, there’s no way that you can prove to me that you understand personal mortality. If, for the sake of argument, I were to point a loaded firearm at you and you were to attack me, attempt to flee, beg for your life, whatever, there’s no way you could prove to me that your actions are motivated by a subjective will to not die: for all I know you might just be acting very convincingly like someone who understands mortality without actually having any interiority whatsoever.
However, there is social utility in assuming that others are capable of understanding abstract concepts when they perform actions in accordance with such an understanding. And from the fact that most animals will try to avoid things that they can reasonably understand will cause them death (natural predators, environmental hazards, anything that has caused them injury), we can likewise extrapolate that they don’t want to die.
it’s not solipsism. it animal cognitive behavioral study.
> Puts a bullet in you
> bystanders freaking out
> not to worry, I have the perfect justification prepared > “Oh nonono it’s ok, they just don’t have any sort of consciousness. it’s not solipsism. it commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com behavioural study.” > nailedit.jpg
i never suggested they don’t have consciousness, though i rather doubt that some animals, like muscles, do. i said they don’t understand personal mortality. if you can find me an animal cognitive behaviorist who disagrees, i’d love to read their work.
treating different things differently is necessary for right action. you wouldn’t treat a whale like a lion or vice versa.
I didn’t say anything about worthiness or lesser treatment.
In the sense that they both have a drive for self-preservation that I believe ought to be respected where no immediate threat to wellbeing exists, yes actually, I would treat a whale like a lion and simply not murder either of them for food. In fact, in my everyday life, I do treat them exactly the same because I have exactly zero interactions with either.
do you treat your phone like you treat your neighbors phone, and like you treat your laptop, and like you treat your car?
It’s almost as though you’re completely disregarding the context and the scope of my previous response because you’re arguing in bad faith.
Yes, I can accept that different things are different and this will sometimes mean that it’s okay to accordingly act differently, but sometimes different things have similarities and you’re here arguing for discriminatory treatment in the context where they’re actually not that different. Whales, lions, sheep and humans alike have a drive for self-preservation. Thus, they should similarly be allowed to live without being killed in cold blood by those who are capable of knowing better than to inflict needless suffering.
I have stated my reasoning again and again. It is on you to provide a justification for the discrepancy you’re here supporting.
there is no reason to suppose eating animals is bad. since it is so normal, both among humans and in the natural world, the burden is on those who propose that we don’t do that.
I’m really glad I made a PieFed instance, because it means I get to ban people like you who obstinately push realist authoritarian points that were rebutted several messages ago, like you’re on some kind of script for exhausting the enemy. MULTIVERSE’s rule about limited authoritarianism is something I’m really proud of in how it specifically bans these kinds of tactics which are optimised to exhaust and/or intimidate the left wing opposition.
I mean I know you by reputation, I’ve seen you do this kind of thing before. But I still gave you the benefit of the doubt today, and it’s making this tankie ban feel just so much more satisfying.
explaining that people deserve more respect than nonpersons isn’t right wing, just as it’s antithesis isn’t left wing.
nothing was debunked
I’m right, and I’m not a tankie, but I hope you enjoy your echo chamber