How to talk to someone encountering the "I will not exist after death." realization.

watchoutacat · 1 month

I think it's possible for one to wish they lived in an earlier time. But I don't think potential people have a right to be conceived which is why no one can be justifiably angry that they weren't born earlier. They have no right to those past experiences.

But everyone has a right to future experiences. It's why murder is wrong and why we try our best to save people in hospitals. Granted no one can live for ever, but there's a sense of violation of our rights when we think of dying. We're losing something we think we're entitled to.

Jasperodus · 1 month

Someone should build a database of subreddits that people subscribe to and make a recommendation algorithm based on what people with similar interests to you subscribe to.

djrollsroyce · 1 month

So according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_roller_coaster_rankings, I think this would be the 7th tallest and 8th fastest roller coaster in the world.

djrollsroyce · 1 month

The Behemoth was surprisingly fast compared to some of the other coasters there.

Remy45 · 1 month

I was the other way around. I used to drink almost exclusively Unibroue beers because I didn't realize the LCBO had a much bigger selection.

Remy45 · 1 month

It's easy to find good beers in the pubs. As for retail, stay away from The Beer Store and go to the LCBO instead.

remingtonsteel · 1 month

I used to hate biking on Bathurst. I usually did Spadina -> Davenport -> St Georges instead. Good to hear it got repaved.

remingtonsteel · 1 month

That hill kept me in very good shape when I commuted to downtown.

IAMAJossWhedon · 1 month

My point was that it's possible to be a fuck up and still have a modicum of respect afterwards.

IAMAJossWhedon · 1 month

The same reason George W is still called Mr. President.

PowerDowner · 1 month

This is exactly how most countries do it, things that are more intuitive in imperial (like weight and height) are still measured in imperial.

SantiClaws · 1 month

A++ would program again.

Unicornasaurus · 1 month

I didn't know James Gandolfini was a Canucks fan.

trot-trot · 1 month

makes them loose

You meant to say "lose". Loose rhymes with moose.

too_funny · 1 month

Yes, otherwise he'll be less likely to wear a helmet when it is necessary.

CommieCanuck · 1 month

The last line:

This concludes the application. If you chose to fill out the French version, please place it in a sealed envelope and submit it to our human resources department. If you filled out the English version, please save us all time by placing it directly into your recycling bin.

gdrapos · 1 month

Racism and sexism are unfounded beliefs of superiority, whereas speciesism is a very clear acknowledgement of superiority (though superiority isn't really the right word - let's say of special consideration)

No one believes that they are bigoted. A racist certainly doesn't think his reasons for being racist are unfounded. You have a point that this sort of reasoning is the way that people do eat animals free of guilt, but saying "we're better, therefore we can exploit you" is in itself not moral justification.

There is not any such evidence that whites are superior to blacks or that men are superior to women

What is the evidence that humans are better than animals? Keeping in mind that we grant rights to infants, mentally handicapped and there are many animals who demonstrate higher level intelligence.

Singer's argument implies that all animals are equal and the same considerations should apply to a gerbil as to a human. Fwiw, I'm not sure if I agree with this or not yet. Still a new concept, albeit one that seems to make a lot of sense.

gdrapos · 1 month

But, here's the thing: if it is immoral to eat animals, what do we do about predatory animals/carnivores?

The biggest difference is that we don't need to eat meat to survive, carnivores do. The second difference (which also ties in to the animals being immoral bit) is that we have the capacity to understand when what we are doing is right or wrong. We have a responsibility that other animals do not. When a mentally handicapped person commits a crime we give them more lenient sentences / keep them in more comfortable prisons.

I mean, how can we protect the carnivore's rights not to suffer and be harmed and live while simultaneously protecting the herbivores?

I don't think it is our job to protect animals from each other. Nothing is obligating you to go out of your way to help others. Helping someone with a flat tire is a nice thing to do, but not helping them doesn't make you a bad person. However, if you slashed their tire, that is immoral. It's the same thing with animals.

We cannot, realistically, acknowledge animal rights outside of a limited group of domesticated animals because if we did so, and were consistent, we'd have to let ourselves starve to death

If the human population did go vegetarian it isn't something that would happen in the next 100 years, but it would have to start somewhere. I'm not suggesting we do this, but in general raising livestock takes up more space than agriculture (with exceptions). The transition would by no means be easy, but it's something that is possible without starving to death.

I feel like I should mention that I'm not a vegetarian. Singer's argument is new to me, and I'm still trying to find ways to challenge it myself. As of yet I'm having some trouble.

gdrapos · 1 month

I suspect you might be in my philosophy class. The more I think about this the more convinced I am that there aren't any rebuttals that don't sugar coat the words "It's inconvenient".

I think you have to either give up meat or find a way to live with yourself knowing that you are using the same logic that other bigots use. Maybe this makes me a bad person, but I'm not prepared to give up meat anytime soon.

gdrapos · 1 month

We aren't talking about how society works here, we're talking about basic rights.

We don't think experimenting/eating mentally challenged people is ethically correct, so why shouldn't this extend to animals? You can come up with as many arguments as you want, but in the end the only thing they'll all boil down to is "it's inconvenient".

gdrapos · 1 month

That's also the argument slave owners used to defend slavery.

"We give them food. We give them shelter. We give them a decent and stable life! They would be much worse off if it weren't for slavery."

gdrapos · 1 month

I'm not convinced of this. I don't understand how the mentally handicapped support your argument and I don't think it's ok to "ignore them for the moment". Children and the mentally handicapped play a huge role in Singer's argument as they reject the notion that animals don't have rights due to lower brain function.

I also disagree that Singer doesn't want to acknowledge the reality of the world. He states that the only reason we don't give animals rights is because it would be inconvenient, just as it was inconvenient for the southern states to give up slavery. Singer says if you want to eat meat then that is ok, just be aware that you are using the exact same rationale that racists, sexists and any other manner of bigot would use.

For context, I am not a vegetarian and I don't plan on giving up meat any time soon. I can't think of any arguments that hold up against Singer's so for now I've resigned myself to being speciesist.

gdrapos · 1 month

This is a good summary of the way things are, but it doesn't really touch the question of should animals have rights or not, which I think is what OP is trying to get at.

Dude_Im_Godly · 1 month

YOU AND WHAT TEAM, YOU JOBLESS HOBO.

chefboyohboy · 1 month

Hard to call it an April fools prank when it's 95% true.

Two-Year Club	reddit gold Since June 2011
reddit mold	Verified Email

ahal89

TROPHY CASE

ahal89

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login