Freethought & Rationalism Archive

tronvillain · 03-13-2002, 01:06 PM

spin:

Quote:

I wouldn't believe all that you read in books. Human evolution is clear that humans were not originally "omnivores". Human anatomy says that humans didn't develop for eating meat -- their intestines are far too long. The person who says that humans are omnivores are being as opportunitic as the humans that started eating meat. While the latter were forced to do so for lack of suitable herbivorous foods, the latter is merely maintaining an old myth for the sake of the stomach.

<a href="http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-6e.shtml" target="_blank">Overview of Gut (Digestive System Morphology in Primates and Humans</a>. We appear to be accurately described as omnivores.

Malaclypse the Younger · 03-13-2002, 01:08 PM

spin

Quote:

This is a misrepresentation. First, I did not talk of "evil" aliens, just ones with superior intelligence which eat humans.

Any being who would eat me is evil in my opinion.

Quote:

This was for an analogy for in this world there is no-one in the position to humans as humans are to animals.

Reasoning by analogy is always suspect. In this case you are equivocating degree of intelligence with qualitative differences in cognitive processes. But your arguments here have not been particularly precise, merely sanctimonious.

Quote:

But people are not prepared to think of such analogies for they are too busy being put off by aliens, and not able to deal with the simple logic. In short your analysis is miguided.

Analogies require complex logic, and are usually useless for proving anything. It is arguable that you use no logic whatsoever, simple or otherwise, merely sanctimonious emotional arguments dressed up in logical terminology. In short you provide us with no analysis per se of any kind.

That's the beauty of imprecise logical arguments. Rather than rebut them, you merely assert they are misguided. Since no logical sense can be consistently extracted from your statements in the first place, you are proof against logical rebuttal. Perhaps you might consider a career in the clergy?

Quote:

When one uses analogies to reflect on a particular aspect, one is not thinking so much about the content of the analogy but what the analogy represents. Strike 2, Macaclypse.

The argument is that you are not thinking in the first place, merely asserting your authority. Strike 234,345,645, spin.

Quote:

Throw in a few ad hominems and nonsequiturs, and you have the vegetarian moral argument presented here in its entirety.

You're waffling here, Macaclypse.

I'm waffling? Are you the least bit uncertain about my position? Is English your second language?

Quote:

The arguments are there. You seem to be too busy looking at the wrong things.

Oh yes, I forgot the unassailable position of your own authority to declare ethical truth. My most humble apologies.

Quote:

Unfortunately, unsupported statements are the sign of no content. Perhaps you have something to say, but you don't because you don't voice them in a representative manner to show that you are talking of anything coherent.

Your fallacies, rudeness and sanctimoniousness have been pointed out time and again by other posters here. I assume the readers are capable of understanding and remembering other posts on the thread and do not need me to recapitulate every point.

Quote:

You don't have to be like them. Do you think it's ok to slaughter animals for peoples' appetites?

Yes, yes I do. Pass the catsup.

Quote:

If so are you prepared to be honest and do the slaughtering yourself? I'd guess you wouldn't, as most people wouldn't.

You would guess wrong. Of course the arrogance of this guess is entirely unsurprising.

bonduca · 03-13-2002, 01:14 PM

The only thing this thread has done is make me want a steak and a beer.

tronvillain · 03-13-2002, 01:21 PM

spin:

Quote:

If so are you prepared to be honest and do the slaughtering yourself? I'd guess you wouldn't, as most people wouldn't.

I've never understood this argument. There is nothing dishonest about being unwilling to do something yourself but being willing to let someone else do it for you. I would be willing to kill an animal myself, though exactly how willing depends on the degree of mess, pain, effort, and time involved.

bonduca · 03-13-2002, 01:28 PM

How are people in urban setting supposed to raise and slaughter their own meat?

Megatron · 03-13-2002, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bonduca:
<strong>The only thing this thread has done is make me want a steak and a beer.

</strong>

You too, eh?

Pomp · 03-13-2002, 01:30 PM

bonduca,

How are people in urban setting supposed to raise and slaughter their own meat?

What? You aren't willing to move to a rural area specifically for the privledge of eating meat? Why, I bet you use electricity that was produced by burning coal or gas that you didn't personally extract from the earth! I can't speak to such a depraved person.

bonduca · 03-13-2002, 01:34 PM

Heh. The depths of my depravity have not even been hinted at.

Bonduca, steak breath

tronvillain · 03-13-2002, 01:41 PM

Well, I'm going to go eat a roast beef pita. Mmmmmm. Maybe I'll get bacon today.

spin · 03-13-2002, 01:42 PM

I'm quite amused at the inordinate number of people who feel the necessity to come in to the discussion who aren't contributing to it in any way. Most try to be funny, some merely nitpick, so attempt to take a distanced_I'm not_involved approach. The only problem here is that there is a flood of mostly unrelated comments that one has to wade through.

spin:
--------------------
This is a misrepresentation. First, I did not talk of "evil" aliens, just ones with superior intelligence which eat humans.
--------------------

macaclypse:
--------------------
Any being who would eat me is evil in my opinion.
--------------------

Well, then, I'm sure you would understand someone who empathises with animals.

spin:
------------------------------
This was for an analogy for in this world there is no-one in the position to humans as humans are to animals.
------------------------------

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Reasoning by analogy is always suspect. In this case you are equivocating degree of intelligence with qualitative differences in cognitive processes. But your arguments here have not been particularly precise, merely sanctimonious.
------------------------------

You're welcome to your value judgements. They are not argument. But if there is any core argument in the above, you'll need to flesh out the second sentence which is the only one that has the ossibility of any communicative value.

spin:
------------------------------
But people are not prepared to think of such analogies for they are too busy being put off by aliens, and not able to deal with the simple logic. In short your analysis is miguided.
------------------------------

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Analogies require complex logic, and are usually useless for proving anything.
------------------------------

An analogy is not meant to prove anything by to render an idea. Obviously when one doesn't contemplate the analogy one cannot get the idea being transmitted.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
It is arguable that you use no logic whatsoever, simple or otherwise, merely sanctimonious emotional arguments dressed up in logical terminology. In short you provide us with no analysis per se of any kind.
------------------------------

This is only ad hominem time wasting Macaclypse. You are not prepared to read the analogy that you are complaining about as an analogy and treat it as such. I don't expect that you'll find anything in something that you don't bother to understand.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
That's the beauty of imprecise logical arguments. Rather than rebut them, you merely assert they are misguided. Since no logical sense can be consistently extracted from your statements in the first place, you are proof against logical rebuttal. Perhaps you might consider a career in the clergy?
------------------------------

Sounds like you work in a government jobn.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
The argument is that you are not thinking in the first place, merely asserting your authority. Strike 234,345,645, spin.
------------------------------

Wasting your vain breath. The arguments were available for you to read, but I don't exect you to. You are too busy waffling on and calling someone else arrogant, when you don't bother to understand what is being talked about and how.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
I'm waffling? Are you the least bit uncertain about my position?
------------------------------

No. You're wasting your time being a smartass.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Is English your second language?
------------------------------

As you have trouble understanding what I have said, your question is auto-ironic.

spin:
------------------------------
The arguments are there. You seem to be too busy looking at the wrong things.
------------------------------

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Oh yes, I forgot the unassailable position of your own authority to declare ethical truth. My most humble apologies.
------------------------------

You might do better, if you only wanted an argument and an opportunity to say pedantic things, to find something else to waste your time over. I don't take kindly to the range of sarcasm, thoughtlessness, reductionism, and demeaning communications that has been in this topic. You come along riding on your white little charger untouched and supercilious and think you can drop pearls of pedantry, pretending to be a logician, and expect to be treated well.

Irony needs to have a suitable context for the audience to receive it, so I'd suggest you stick your apologies, where most of your thoughts have come from.

spin:
------------------------------
Unfortunately, unsupported statements are the sign of no content. Perhaps you have something to say, but you don't because you don't voice them in a representative manner to show that you are talking of anything coherent.
------------------------------

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Your fallacies,
------------------------------

Unconscious self-irony #1

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
rudeness
------------------------------

Unconscious self-irony #2

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
and sanctimoniousness
------------------------------

Unconscious self-irony #3

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
have been pointed out time and again by other posters here.
------------------------------

That you feel secure in numbers must be comforting, Macaclypse. It's not food for argument.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
I assume the readers are capable of understanding and remembering other posts on the thread and do not need me to recapitulate every point.
------------------------------

I'll assume you've got nothing better to do than grandstand.

spin:
------------------------------
You don't have to be like them. Do you think it's ok to slaughter animals for peoples' appetites?
------------------------------

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Yes, yes I do. Pass the catsup.
------------------------------

You could have saved much of your postings by stopping the pretense of neutral observer. You are admitting to being another time waster.

spin:
------------------------------
If so are you prepared to be honest and do the slaughtering yourself? I'd guess you wouldn't, as most people wouldn't.
------------------------------

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
You would guess wrong.
------------------------------

It's ok to be wrong sometimes. I usually assume people want to be serious.

Macaclypse:
------------------------------
Of course the arrogance of this guess is entirely unsurprising.
------------------------------

But you can't assume why someone is wrong, unless you are God, but then you probably don't exist.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-13-2002, 01:14 PM	#173
bonduca Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: . Posts: 1,653	The only thing this thread has done is make me want a steak and a beer.

03-13-2002, 01:28 PM	#175
bonduca Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: . Posts: 1,653	How are people in urban setting supposed to raise and slaughter their own meat?

03-13-2002, 01:30 PM	#177
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	bonduca, How are people in urban setting supposed to raise and slaughter their own meat? What? You aren't willing to move to a rural area specifically for the privledge of eating meat? Why, I bet you use electricity that was produced by burning coal or gas that you didn't personally extract from the earth! I can't speak to such a depraved person.

03-13-2002, 01:34 PM	#178
bonduca Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: . Posts: 1,653	Heh. The depths of my depravity have not even been hinted at. Bonduca, steak breath

03-13-2002, 01:41 PM	#179
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Well, I'm going to go eat a roast beef pita. Mmmmmm. Maybe I'll get bacon today.

03-13-2002, 01:42 PM	#180
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	I'm quite amused at the inordinate number of people who feel the necessity to come in to the discussion who aren't contributing to it in any way. Most try to be funny, some merely nitpick, so attempt to take a distanced_I'm not_involved approach. The only problem here is that there is a flood of mostly unrelated comments that one has to wade through. spin: -------------------- This is a misrepresentation. First, I did not talk of "evil" aliens, just ones with superior intelligence which eat humans. -------------------- macaclypse: -------------------- Any being who would eat me is evil in my opinion. -------------------- Well, then, I'm sure you would understand someone who empathises with animals. spin: ------------------------------ This was for an analogy for in this world there is no-one in the position to humans as humans are to animals. ------------------------------ Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Reasoning by analogy is always suspect. In this case you are equivocating degree of intelligence with qualitative differences in cognitive processes. But your arguments here have not been particularly precise, merely sanctimonious. ------------------------------ You're welcome to your value judgements. They are not argument. But if there is any core argument in the above, you'll need to flesh out the second sentence which is the only one that has the ossibility of any communicative value. spin: ------------------------------ But people are not prepared to think of such analogies for they are too busy being put off by aliens, and not able to deal with the simple logic. In short your analysis is miguided. ------------------------------ Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Analogies require complex logic, and are usually useless for proving anything. ------------------------------ An analogy is not meant to prove anything by to render an idea. Obviously when one doesn't contemplate the analogy one cannot get the idea being transmitted. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ It is arguable that you use no logic whatsoever, simple or otherwise, merely sanctimonious emotional arguments dressed up in logical terminology. In short you provide us with no analysis per se of any kind. ------------------------------ This is only ad hominem time wasting Macaclypse. You are not prepared to read the analogy that you are complaining about as an analogy and treat it as such. I don't expect that you'll find anything in something that you don't bother to understand. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ That's the beauty of imprecise logical arguments. Rather than rebut them, you merely assert they are misguided. Since no logical sense can be consistently extracted from your statements in the first place, you are proof against logical rebuttal. Perhaps you might consider a career in the clergy? ------------------------------ Sounds like you work in a government jobn. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ The argument is that you are not thinking in the first place, merely asserting your authority. Strike 234,345,645, spin. ------------------------------ Wasting your vain breath. The arguments were available for you to read, but I don't exect you to. You are too busy waffling on and calling someone else arrogant, when you don't bother to understand what is being talked about and how. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ I'm waffling? Are you the least bit uncertain about my position? ------------------------------ No. You're wasting your time being a smartass. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Is English your second language? ------------------------------ As you have trouble understanding what I have said, your question is auto-ironic. spin: ------------------------------ The arguments are there. You seem to be too busy looking at the wrong things. ------------------------------ Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Oh yes, I forgot the unassailable position of your own authority to declare ethical truth. My most humble apologies. ------------------------------ You might do better, if you only wanted an argument and an opportunity to say pedantic things, to find something else to waste your time over. I don't take kindly to the range of sarcasm, thoughtlessness, reductionism, and demeaning communications that has been in this topic. You come along riding on your white little charger untouched and supercilious and think you can drop pearls of pedantry, pretending to be a logician, and expect to be treated well. Irony needs to have a suitable context for the audience to receive it, so I'd suggest you stick your apologies, where most of your thoughts have come from. spin: ------------------------------ Unfortunately, unsupported statements are the sign of no content. Perhaps you have something to say, but you don't because you don't voice them in a representative manner to show that you are talking of anything coherent. ------------------------------ Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Your fallacies, ------------------------------ Unconscious self-irony #1 Macaclypse: ------------------------------ rudeness ------------------------------ Unconscious self-irony #2 Macaclypse: ------------------------------ and sanctimoniousness ------------------------------ Unconscious self-irony #3 Macaclypse: ------------------------------ have been pointed out time and again by other posters here. ------------------------------ That you feel secure in numbers must be comforting, Macaclypse. It's not food for argument. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ I assume the readers are capable of understanding and remembering other posts on the thread and do not need me to recapitulate every point. ------------------------------ I'll assume you've got nothing better to do than grandstand. spin: ------------------------------ You don't have to be like them. Do you think it's ok to slaughter animals for peoples' appetites? ------------------------------ Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Yes, yes I do. Pass the catsup. ------------------------------ You could have saved much of your postings by stopping the pretense of neutral observer. You are admitting to being another time waster. spin: ------------------------------ If so are you prepared to be honest and do the slaughtering yourself? I'd guess you wouldn't, as most people wouldn't. ------------------------------ Macaclypse: ------------------------------ You would guess wrong. ------------------------------ It's ok to be wrong sometimes. I usually assume people want to be serious. Macaclypse: ------------------------------ Of course the arrogance of this guess is entirely unsurprising. ------------------------------ But you can't assume why someone is wrong, unless you are God, but then you probably don't exist.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.