Who Here Has Children?

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

@RendHeaven @Leo Gura Unless there's a bad treatment involved, it cannot be considered slavery. Restricting freedom of another human being is not the same as restricting freedom of an animal, because for example a well functioning normal human, even if you are taking good care of him/her, you are still doing that human harm by vastly limiting their potential. Animals don't have the same potential as humans, not even by a longshot.

Humans = potential, animals = no potential. That's the real difference. In the latter case restriction of freedom should actually be defined as a symbiotic relationship because we are offering value to the animals and they are giving us some value back, and there's zero harm being done to either side. Yes, farming animals would be slavery. Animals in zoos could also be considered slaves because their real potential is actualized in wild nature. But the kind of animals @Daniel Balan was showing us on photos would die on their own (with the exception of cats, which is not a slave even by the standard definition of slavery, as in, being restricted freedom, because cat can escape from you at any time if it wished to do so. They are with you voluntarily)

Bottom line is, I feel the topic is a bit more complicated and nuanced than you guys portray it to be.

[Salvijus]

A slave is someone who does work for you against their will. What if you have pets and they do nothing for you but you are doing things for them to fulfill their needs? Then it's love. Some cases are different tho. 

Edited 15 hours ago by Salvijus

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

Also would you consider humans that are mentally challenged your slaves just cause you are restricting their freedom to take care of them? For example, people with severe autism. I don't think so. Potential is clearly an important factor to consider

Edited 15 hours ago by NewKidOnTheBlock

[Vibes]

33 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

A slave is someone who does work for you against their will. What if you have pets and they do nothing for you but you are doing things for them to fulfill their needs? Then it's love. Some cases are different tho. 

They are serving to fullfil your emotional needs. 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Vibes said:

They are serving to fullfil your emotional needs. 

Sometimes. It's case by case situation. Plus they are not forced into that role imo. That's a game changer. 

[Soullee]

No children, everybody keep telling me I'm missing out on the joy of having kids. I feel like having child is strong attachment that keep you stuck to this reality. Like you feel like you have parts of you in here and it will stuck with your being. Like even force to reincarnate, since you the reason a soul brought to this world. Now you soul is been brought back. I don't know just how my mind works

[integral]

24 minutes ago, Soullee said:

No children, everybody keep telling me I'm missing out on the joy of having kids. I feel like having child is strong attachment that keep you stuck to this reality. Like you feel like you have parts of you in here and it will stuck with your being. Like even force to reincarnate, since you the reason a soul brought to this world. Now you soul is been brought back. I don't know just how my mind works

Imagine waking without ever having gone to sleep. That's the insanity of birth. 

[RendHeaven]

9 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

She could easily jump the fence and go wherever she wanted. And she did that all the time! But she never left my household for more than a day! If I am the enslaver.. why didn't those beings run the hell away from me?

Domesticated animals are genetically bred to prefer their slave conditions.

This issue of slavery goes far deeper than your individual actions, it's a collective human web.

Acknowledging your "slaving ways" does not make you a nefarious progenitor of evil. It's more like being a willing participant in collective selfishness maximization.

9 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

Guys I tell you! You are deluded and think you know everything about reality just because you took few shrooms or LSD or other psychedelics.

Or, you are close minded. How can we tell the difference?

Really contemplate that. "I'm obviously right and you're obviously wrong" is begging the question.

It looks like you're not really engaging with the step by step breakdowns I've written for you on the meta-abstract mechanism of "slavery"

Your disagreement boils down to "I don't like how that word makes me feel so everything you say must be BS"

9 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

Go live in the real world enjoy mother nature sober!

Not mutually exclusive with psychedelic contemplation lol : )

9 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

With your contemplation and false assumptions you only cause confusion.

Please spell out any "false assumptions" you spot.

[RendHeaven]

9 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Unless there's a bad treatment involved, it cannot be considered slavery.

Sounds like something a slave owner would say.

9 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Humans= potential, animals = no potential.

Self-serving distinction.

9 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Bottom line is, I feel the topic is a bit more complicated and nuanced than you guys portray it to be.

The position I have spelled out is full of nuance.

I've spelled out how slavery is a meta-principle on a spectrum with degrees.

All instances of what I call "slavery" have the commonality of restricting sovereignty and leeching personal gain, while differing in intensity and harm.

This gives a fuller picture of our inter/intra-species relationships.

Whereas the unnuanced position would be to label slavery as an exclusively bad thing and to pretend that we have nothing to do with it and that our practices must be justified and unquestionable. This is the stance of you and Dan. You draw a hard line in your mind which separates the notion of slavery from your daily unconscious practices, and you're prone to arguing fiercely that this line cannot be crossed and that anyone who dares to cross this line, like me or Leo, must be automatically wrong and deluded.

I actually don't have a position to defend here.

I don't care if I turn out to be a slave owner or not. I'm not mad either way. My sensemaking is unclouded.

9 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Yes, farming animals would be slavery. Animals in zoos could also be considered slaves because their real potential is actualized in wild nature. But the kind of animals @Daniel Balan was showing us on photos would die on their own

I'll say it again, but look:

the bottom line is - golden handcuffs are still handcuffs

they call it pet OWNERSHIP for a reason. It's baked into the language we use.

"I own a dog"

"I own a cat"

Try to contemplate the ramifications of that without bias.

The pet owner's benevolent nature is a deflection. Symbiosis is a deflection.

Slavery is fundamentally about OWNING OTHER BEINGS.

Contemplate ownership.

Edited 6 hours ago by RendHeaven
I always manage to typo somehow lmao

[RendHeaven]

8 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Also would you consider humans that are mentally challenged your slaves just cause you are restricting their freedom to take care of them? For example, people with severe autism.

I have never heard anyone say "Oh him? Yeah, I own him" (in reference to helping an autistic kid)

Yet we're happy to say "Oh yeah! I own a cat! "

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

Yet we're happy to say "Oh yeah! I own a cat! "

When I was a child doing philosophy I realized how unfair it is that I own my cat. So I tried to speak of my cat without saying "my" cat, so it didn't imply that I owned her. Only to realize that the English language does not lend itself to that.

Some of my early work on understanding human bias.

Edited 6 hours ago by Leo Gura

[integral]

@Leo Gura looks like every parent here has used the epistemic incorrect vocabulary of "My children". Video title "Mother hood and slavery, one in the same". I'm sure it's going to be very popular.  😅

[Leo Gura]

Parents = Slavelords

Edited 5 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Salvijus]

Something becomes yours when you take responsibility for them also. 

If it's yours by conquest, than it's slavery. 

If it's yours by inclusion, than it's love. 

You can make the whole world yours by taking responsibility for it. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Salvijus