01 Jun 2008, 10:32 pm
MR_BOGAN wrote:
I have never heard of anyone eating cats before, only racist asian jokes about people eating cats.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
Ive heard some stories of muslim guerilla's eating the flesh of hindus they killed
MR_BOGAN
Veteran
Joined: 5 Mar 2008
Age: 123
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,479
Location: The great trailer park in the sky!
01 Jun 2008, 10:37 pm
^ I wouldn't be getting ideas D1nk0
01 Jun 2008, 10:37 pm
D1nk0 wrote:
The answer is NEITHER. I like cats, I dont like most people. Furthermore, other people who are not friends or family pose a FAR GREATER THREAT to me and my interests than cats do! That is why I deliberately choose not to have empathy for them. Not having empathy for strangers means that Im not all that adverse to harming them if they are a threat to people and things that I DO like.
That response just about speaks for itself. Your evaluation of the morality of the idea of eating a cat is hopelessly subjective. You do not seem to have any means of making it something interpersonally binding.
I have not seen any arguments in this thread which could be considered more than sentimentalism as to why this should be regarded negatively. Don't hate, people!
Last edited by twoshots on 01 Jun 2008, 10:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
01 Jun 2008, 10:39 pm
01 Jun 2008, 10:41 pm
D1nk0 wrote:
MR_BOGAN wrote:
I have never heard of anyone eating cats before, only racist asian jokes about people eating cats.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
Ive heard some stories of muslim guerilla's eating the flesh of hindus they killed
claims of cannibalism is much more frequent than actual acts of cannibalism and is normally used as a political device to dehumanize an enemy. not saying that it never occurs but stories like your own seem to be more likely political than it is actual fact.
01 Jun 2008, 10:47 pm
To a certain extent it IS subjective but at the same time I honestly dont think that that's necessarily a bad thing!
How is it NOT in my best interest to think that way? I DONT care about people I dont know! Its a simple as THAT.
Why the Hell should I? WHAT will I gain from that other than the false promise of social approval?
twoshots wrote:
D1nk0 wrote:
The answer is NEITHER. I like cats, I dont like most people. Furthermore, other people who are not friends or family pose a FAR GREATER THREAT to me and my interests than cats do! That is why I deliberately choose not to have empathy for them. Not having empathy for strangers means that Im not all that adverse to harming them if they are a threat to people and things that I DO like.
That response just about speaks for itself. Your evaluation of the morality of the idea of eating a cat is hopelessly subjective. You do not seem to have any means of making it something interpersonally binding.
I have not seen any arguments in this thread which could be considered more than sentimentalism as to why this should be regarded negatively. Don't hate, people!
01 Jun 2008, 10:48 pm
skafather84 wrote:
D1nk0 wrote:
MR_BOGAN wrote:
I have never heard of anyone eating cats before, only racist asian jokes about people eating cats.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
Ive heard some stories of muslim guerilla's eating the flesh of hindus they killed
claims of cannibalism is much more frequent than actual acts of cannibalism and is normally used as a political device to dehumanize an enemy. not saying that it never occurs but stories like your own seem to be more likely political than it is actual fact.
What about Jeffrey Dahmer?
I admit that I have a world view which is based almost entirely on power and the struggle for it and has very little room for empathy. But since WHEN are you a psychiatrist skafather84? Same for YOU twoshots?
I honestly am very cynical towards psychology and have FAR more respect for neurology and neuropsychiatry which seeks to understand how the brain directs behaviour and uses PHYSICAL EXPERIMENTATION rather than just statistical analysis.
Last edited by D1nk0 on 01 Jun 2008, 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
01 Jun 2008, 10:54 pm
01 Jun 2008, 11:01 pm
twoshots wrote:
For the purposes of moral discussions, we like to pretend there is some kind of objective "truth" which we can access, but you seem to have eschewed this entirely for a "ME SAY NO" approach. Good for guiding your own actions, but gives no indicator there is any reality anyone else should care about backing your opinion up.
To discuss why I think your position is ridiculous further, we would need to get into a more deep philosophical discussion not appropriate to this thread.
People use "morality" as a cover to aspouse ideas that they see as being in their self-interest. People tend to AGREE on such because they often have common interests. Since I have VERY little in common with other people I tend to scoff at such moral concepts and values because often I derive NO personal benefit from them. If you want to convince me otherwise you're going to HAVE to demonstrate to me that it is in my self-interest to reconsider my beliefs!Period. What you have said so far is a pretense of intellectual superiority because you dont like what I have to say. Why should I be concerned for those who have no conern for me?
That you mention my "conditioning" shows me that you have a fallacious understanding of peoples motivations and behaviour. People act in their self-interest and when I think about my conditioning I have picked and chosen what things are in my self-interest to follow and what things to reject.
Last edited by D1nk0 on 01 Jun 2008, 11:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
01 Jun 2008, 11:01 pm
01 Jun 2008, 11:14 pm
D1nk0 wrote:
twoshots wrote:
For the purposes of moral discussions, we like to pretend there is some kind of objective "truth" which we can access, but you seem to have eschewed this entirely for a "ME SAY NO" approach. Good for guiding your own actions, but gives no indicator there is any reality anyone else should care about backing your opinion up.
To discuss why I think your position is ridiculous further, we would need to get into a more deep philosophical discussion not appropriate to this thread.
People use "morality" as a cover to aspouse ideas that they see as being in their self-interest. People tend to AGREE on such because they often have common interests. Since I have VERY little in common with other people I tend to scoff at such moral concepts and values because often I derive NO personal benefit from them. If you want to convince me otherwise you're going to HAVE to demonstrate to me that it is in my self-interest to reconsider my beliefs!Period. What you have said so far is a pretense of intellectual superiority because you dont like what I have to say. Why should I be concerned for those who have no conern for me?
Well, you're an egoistic sentimentalist. No arguing with that I suppose
But then again, the intent of ridicule is invariably to demonstrate to those who deep down agree with me that they really do agree with me. Unlike many here, I do not regard debates on axioms as meaningful 
Know that our differences are irreconcilable.And no, applying some measure of actual reasoning to one's views on the world is the core of philosophy. You may disagree, but accusing me of having pretensions to superiority is silly.
Quote:
hat you mention my "conditioning" shows me that you have a fallacious understanding of peoples motivations and behaviour. People act in their self-interest and when I think about my conditioning I have picked and chosen what things are in my self-interest to follow and what things to reject.
Egoism is either normative, tautological, or highly debatable. It is inexpedient given the evidence of animals and evolutionary psychology to suppose that our moral impulses are entirely the product of a rational cost/benefit analysis, and if they were it seems odd that they are introspectively so distinct. It is not at all my intuition that a simple crude egoistic picture minus social conditioning is at all a very good explanation for moral cognition.
01 Jun 2008, 11:23 pm
Kilroy wrote:
Fred2670 wrote:
hundreds
I prefer to "skin" them rather than "scald" them
because it doesnt parboil the meat, which in my
opinion should be either baked or deep fried.
I prefer to "skin" them rather than "scald" them
because it doesnt parboil the meat, which in my
opinion should be either baked or deep fried.
okay so like do you live in the deep south or china
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=PF0OjrFIVWY
I like that band.
01 Jun 2008, 11:25 pm
01 Jun 2008, 11:36 pm
D1nk0 wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
D1nk0 wrote:
MR_BOGAN wrote:
I have never heard of anyone eating cats before, only racist asian jokes about people eating cats.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
People eat dogs in Korea
In Indian cattle are considered sacred I think. People all over the world eat beef, same agument I guess.
Ive heard some stories of muslim guerilla's eating the flesh of hindus they killed
claims of cannibalism is much more frequent than actual acts of cannibalism and is normally used as a political device to dehumanize an enemy. not saying that it never occurs but stories like your own seem to be more likely political than it is actual fact.
What about Jeffrey Dahmer?
I admit that I have a world view which is based almost entirely on power and the struggle for it and has very little room for empathy. But since WHEN are you a psychiatrist skafather84? Same for YOU twoshots?
I honestly am very cynical towards psychology and have FAR more respect for neurology and neuropsychiatry which seeks to understand how the brain directs behaviour and uses PHYSICAL EXPERIMENTATION rather than just statistical analysis.
quit being a troll, as*hole.
edit: done under the analyst of you asking questions unrelated then expressing a negative opinion and redirection (the cannibalism one and then asking about psychology just so you can say that you don't believe in it).
Last edited by skafather84 on 02 Jun 2008, 12:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
01 Jun 2008, 11:37 pm
01 Jun 2008, 11:44 pm
