Something Funny

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,529

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Something Funny

  1. Posted

    14 minutes ago, Basman said:

    Problem is that vegans tend to be ethically inconsistent with their logic. If the premise is that you can't eat animals because its wrong to take a life then you must apply that standard to all life for it to be true (which to a certain extent isn't physically possible). Now, if the premise is that you don't want to eat animals because you feel sorry for farm animals specifically, then your in the clear. Its a subtle difference.

    This is a common pitfall for many vegans who try to use ethics to justify veganism, yes. But then basically every philosophical system has its limitations. Just watch Leo's videos on science, post modernism, religion, spiral dynamics stages. They all have some kind of philosophical pitfall.

  3. Posted

    @Basman not another question about plants and microbes, please. You are killing me guys. Read all my other responses to that.

    22 minutes ago, Basman said:

    Likewise, do you vacuum spiders in your apartment? Do you feel the same compassion towards spiders?

    Sometimes I do, sometimes I try to do my best to carry them out instead. I do feel compassion towards them. And considering how I'm just trying to implement mostly vegan lifestyle, I just treat it as one of the points I am working on.

    25 minutes ago, Basman said:

    Assuming your a typical vegan

    I've said in my original post that I am not a vegan. Do you guys only read titles or something?

    26 minutes ago, Basman said:

    veganism so selective about what you care about

    I select what I care about based on carefully contemplating it. It not based on cuteness, it's based on how can I realistically minimise the suffering I cause in my life. I am definitely not okay with meat and livestock industries because they are just horrible.

    I don't care about deaths of bacteria killed by my body because I do not believe they experience any suffering, and even if they did, there is nothing I can do apart from dying, which will also kill a ton of cells and bacteria that used to live in my body. So this is a dumb point to make overall, it's like spending your life worrying about a blackhole appearing and sucking up the earth.

    For plants, please READ my previous answers.

    At the moment of starting this thread I was okay with ethically sourced wool and beeswax, but since I've been doing a lot of learning in the meantime, I am not so sure about those anymore. They seem shady and I need to keep researching them to come to a final decision.

    Now I have a question for you. Are you okay with eating people? Assuming that their life is not more valuable than lives of pigs and cows, and that you are not like those vegan hypocrites, with their selective compassion, you should be okay with eating people, right?

  5. Posted

    @Marcel another point. Why is it that every meat product that has an animal on its packaging show a happy, healthy, animal, often drawn in cartoonish cute way? Why not show them bloody, tortured, and abused?

    Because the vast majority of people would be repulsed by it and not by the product. This tells me that most people see animal suffering as a bad thing when confronted with it face to face.

  6. Posted

    Just now, Marcel said:

    And yes. If they allowed themselves to reflect or practice genuine compassion it would hurt bitterly in retrospect.

    That's what I am trying to say. Sure many people avoid thinking about things to deeply, are detached from their emotions, or are cruel. Some literally have no empathy due to how their brain works. But most people, with healthy, neurotypical brain, when fully conscious of what they are doing, would feel bad about killing an animal.

  7. Posted

    12 minutes ago, Marcel said:

    The problem is perception ( including, culture, conditioning etc. ) The emotional reaction or lack of one is dependent on how someone views an animal or plant. 

     

    Yes, but why are those culture, conditioning, etc., one way and not the other? I think that everyone kind of intuitively recognises how killing an animal is not the best thing in the world to do. It's just that when survival, and food, and money, and sex, come into play it's very easy to ignore this intuition and rationalise it away. 

    13 minutes ago, Marcel said:

    A farmer that kicks animals ( or worse ) like in the documentary you shared doesn’t have much of a reaction anymore, or even enjoys  it! Like the guys hunting wild boar.

     

    Because he is probably completely desensitised and estranged from himself. Just imagine what working in that hell must be like. If you kept your emotions there you would just go insane and kill yourself in a week. It's like people who dissociate when something traumatic happens to them.

    Hunting is different. I believe there is a natural hunting instinct in us that makes people enjoy it. But I wonder how they would feel about what they did if they actually sat down, allowed their hormones to chill out and contemplated their actions. Because it seems to me that anyone who does that will start feeling bad about hunting and killing.

    This was not a boar btw, just a wild pig. Like they said, those are just pigs that people brought on ships with them in the past and let loose. A wild boar would fuck them all up so bad it's not even funny.

  8. Posted · Edited by Something Funny

    @Buck Edwards I am sorry, I really tried talking to but I just can't.

    I have said multiple time how I am not vegan, yet you write "if you are so into being vegan".

    I've said multiple time how nothing is objectively good or bad, and how morality is subjective, and yet you once again ask me why should my feelings be more important than anyone else's.

    It's just not possible to have a conversation with you. It's like you don't even read what another person writes, you just keep talking to your self. 

  9. Posted

    Just now, Buck Edwards said:

    The difference is only in perception and social conditioning. 

    You got it in the wrong order. Feelings dictate social conditioning. How come society has evolved to see this as a bad thing?

    And perception is literally the only thing that there is for you. In a world where there are no objective moral values and ethics, all you have to guide you are your feelings and perceptions.

  10. Posted

    13 minutes ago, Marcel said:

    Well, the experiment can be easily replicated and verified or disproven of course, if someone set out to do so. ( Only part of the video I actually cared about, forgot to timestamp it, my apologies )

    Not everyone, that's exactly the challenge. You need a controlled environment where you know that no other factor influence its electric conductivity. How do you that? Maybe that who killed the other plant was sweating heavily, or was sick, or was on her period, used some cosmetics product, etc., etc.

    And even if you do it perfectly, all you are left with is the knowledge that plant's conductivity changes. What does a change in conductivity mean?

    15 minutes ago, Marcel said:

    Lets face it. We, at a very large scale do not understand plants or how they may or may not perceive or feel pain etc.

    The idea plants could be conscious or can feel pain similar to humans or animals is a very radical paradigm shift. 

    Yes.

    But here is another paradigm shift:

    There is a huge difference in how cruel and desensitised a person needs to be to pick a flower and to kill an animal.
    There is a huge difference in how you will feel emotionally if you kill an animal with your own hands and if you pick up a carrot and eat it. 

    Why is that? Have you ever thought about it?

  12. Posted · Edited by Something Funny

    @Marcel okay, so a bunch of inconclusive studies with questionable methodology and inconclusive results, and nothing on pain or suffering.

    1. electrical conductivity changes in response to a variety of stimuli including emotions or thoughts.

    All that tells us is that depending on a stimuli, plant body conducts electricity differently. Which can be said about literally anything. Metals will have different conductivity based on temperature and other environmental factors. There is no evidence that would suggest that plant can make a conscious decision to change it, their material just reacts to environmental conditions.

    2. Plants respond to a variety of stimuli, like light, touch, and sound.

    Yes, that's pretty self-evident and expected. You put a flower in a dark room and it will die. You touch a gentle plant too much and it will die. Sounds can probably disturb them to, but that's not a plant exclusive thing, it's just a physical phenomenon. Have you ever grown crystal in school? 

    This tells us nothing about suffering, or pain.

    3. Plants can communicate through chemical signals

    Once again, really interesting but irrelevant. One plant releases a chemical cause it's being eaten -> another plants receptors detect it and start releasing it as well. That's not a conscious decision, just like it's not a conscious decision for you to start salivating when you smell tasty food.

    4. The kills of the dracena

    Very interesting if true, but as it says in the video, probably just flawed methodology.

     

  14. Posted

    3 minutes ago, Marcel said:

    What if it’s exactly like that for them too, when they are harvested, uprooted etc. ? 

     

    1. I refer you to my comment about how more plants due to animal farming than due to human consumption.
    2. My common sense tells me that it's not like that for them too. Do we have any evidence that plant feel pain and suffer in the same way that animals do? With animals we know for a fact that they have pain receptors and we can see pain signals and measure the levels of pain due to brain scans. There is also no reason why plants would evolve the ability to feel pain when they can't do anything about it. Pain is a survival mechanism. Plants have different survival strategies like having thorns and being poisonous.

  20. Posted

    @Buck Edwards I mean... sorry, but this is just really frustrating. And I am tired of wasting my effort on writing down elaborate arguments when you either ignore them, or don't want to understand them, or actually don't understand them...

    4 minutes ago, Buck Edwards said:

    shows how little empathy you have for anyone at all, let alone animals.

    Nice gaslighting. 

  23. Posted

    3 minutes ago, numbersinarow said:

    What do I challenge? There's no propositions at all, just a subjective statement which could be true no matter what variable you have.

     

    Look at what @Sincerity did with questioning the nature of my motivation and if it's strong enough. This is how people question and discuss things when they have more than 1 brain cell.

    5 minutes ago, numbersinarow said:

    Or is the proposition "If one loves animals one ought to be a vegan."?

    It doesn't really make much sense considering that you going vegan will still result in animal slaughter continuing.

    This sentence doesn't make sense because going vegan does not result in animal slaughter continuing. You could say that one person going vegan will not stop animal slaughter. But you have to be completely divorced from logic to say that veganism RESULTS in animal slaughter continuing...

    And I didn't make that proposition. But if I did, it would make total sense because yes, if you love someone you don't want to harm or kill them. It's that simple. 

    9 minutes ago, numbersinarow said:

    You can post massively biased vegan memes but you DO probably care about not just suffering, but killing, if you have empathy. And vegans kill plants and the bacteria in their body, they aren't willing to case living in order to make their body stop killing bacteria. That argument is invalid to them. Well, to a meat eater, you apply the same logic to animals, and to them, that argument is invalid. What a similarity. You can't POSSIBLY think there's an objective way to decide that the bacteria are inferior to animals. This amounts to a huge amount of bias and self-justification for an emotional decision.

    I love how you are argument is self defeating but you are not even able to realise it. You are saying to how there is no objective way to decide that bacteria is inferior to animals, but then if that's true then buy the same logic there is no reason why death is objectively worse than being alive. And there is no reason why killing is objectively wrong. Or why suffering is objectively bad.

    So if nothing is objectively bad, than there is no reason why anyone HAS to care about anything. I don't HAVE to care about killing as a whole. I don't HAVE to care for killing at all.

    So how do I decide what do I care about? Based on love, emotions, and personal preference. And based on this I've decided that I care about animal suffering and death more than I care about bacteria.

    And I am not going to post why going vegan actually reduce the amount of plants we consume for the third time, it's not my fault you guys can't read.

    ***

    I love how vegans try to logic and reason, trying to reduce the suffering and impact they cause and people like you operate based on childish arguments like "Vegans are not willing to die to save the bacteria, so they are hypocrites". What a joke.

  25. Posted · Edited by Something Funny

    @Buck Edwards it's like you didn't read the post, the title, or my response to you at all, and just decided to bang your head against the keyboard to see what words happen to pop up. Or have zero reading comprehension skills. Or bad english. IDK.

    9 hours ago, Buck Edwards said:

    It's not okay to ask others for motivation when the motivation should be intrinsic

    The title says: "CHALLENGE MY MOTIVATION" yet somehow you literally made it out to be the opposite of what I wrote.

    Quote

    it's like you just want to anger people who eat meat or make them feel less which is usually the general rhetoric of the forum

    Please show me a single bad word that I wrote about people who eat meat.

    9 hours ago, Buck Edwards said:

    And nobody is a saint for being vegan

    Multiple times in my responses I've said how I don't believe in calling things good or bad, but you've successfully ignored it and spun your own narrative about saints.

    9 hours ago, Buck Edwards said:

    You can always be a vegan if you truly want to be.

    I have clearly stated that I don't consider myself to be vegan, which you also ignored.

    It's like you saw the word "vegan" in the title, you brain scanned itself for all associations you've ever had with that word, and then you just poured them all out, with no regard to what my post was actually about...

    9 hours ago, Buck Edwards said:

    because they still hurt plants. 

    9 hours ago, Buck Edwards said:

    It wasn't an anti-vegan argument.

    Okay, I am going to address this idiotic point since you don't wanna drop it... 

    IT IS an anti-vegan argument. It is literally the most common, retarded argument, that every idiot uses when they want to debate a vegan person. It is so cliche that it has become a literal meme in the vegan community.


    Screenshot 2024-11-17 at 10.24.13-min.pngEven if we accept you premise of "plants feel pain too", veganism would still be the best option to reduce the suffering of both plants and animal, as well as to minimise your environmental impact as much as possible in general since livestock industry requires a shit ton of crops to sustain itself. It is also responsible for deforestation and pollution of the environment. 

    Or did you think all those cows that you eat grow from sunshine?

    But of course it's much more convenient to have an all or nothing mentality and be like "well, plants feel pain too, and all living being consume each other to exist, so veganism doesn't matter. Nobody is a saint". And then people go and call vegans naive, vegans who actually adopt a way more grounded realistic approach of trying to minimise their impact and suffering they cause as much as they can vs just being like "ehh, there is always some suffering anyway, might as well throw in a few genocides for a good measure". 

     

    Screenshot 2024-11-17 at 10.26.24-min.png

    Screenshot 2024-11-17 at 10.24.41-min.png