If eating meat is unethical, why is it ok to kill babies?

[one_raven]

and we can't communicate with chimps or dolphines in any way to know their thoughts.

THAT'S what makes it presumptuous.

it's obvious to anyone with common sense to see that we're a lot more intelligent than apes. if apes could think like we, they could write here and express their opinion.

And THAT'S what makes it arrogant.
Think for a second about the bushmen of Kalahari.
Up until the 1970's they had no written language, no "modern" technology, and no one outside their community could speak their language.
Does that mean that they were not as self-aware or intelligent as us?

all things are selfaware at some level, even plants and matter (like i said), but no other lifeform is aware of itself as much as a human.

How do you know that?

 

[Roman]

viable fetus blah blah blah are you still reading blah blah blah

What's a viable fetus? Is that like a ripe one? Cause I like mine picked early. No bones.

And I'm not really still reading. I skimmed to be honest. One thing especially caught my eye:
The belief that if it causes pain, don't do it.

Animals feel pain. How do we know? Burn it and it will recoil and make noise much the same we would make noise if we were burned. We empathize. Biologically, we both have nerves. So if it haves nerves, it must feel pain, so therefore let's not eat it.

Conclusion (I skipped some premises, forgive me):
Plants don't have nerves, so they must not feel. Therefore, we eat plants and not animals.

But plants react to stimuli just like animals do, albeit slower. They must have some sort of ability to feel, because like any living organism, they wish to continue to living. So if the feel, they must feel pain. But not on the level an animal does, right? No brain stem. How does that make it ok to eat them?

 

[spuriousmonkey]

What experiments do you

The experiments that involve killing: Tissue culture. Organ culture. In situ's. Immuno's. Basic stuff.

do and what for?

To understand the basic principles that govern tooth development


Nothing of this stuff I do is going to cure cancer, or give you new teeth. It's totally pointless from a practical perspective. Although I probably could develop a method to generate new teeth if you give me enough money and time. Something that could be build upon. I just don't care.

But then again, do we just want to be ignorant monkeys that do not truly understand our world?

Personally I do not give a shit about practical research. It's all wasted. All claim to do cancer research, but hardly anyone really does it. It's just a front. To get money. Because sadly in modern society nobody is interested in our world. They are only interested in money. In finding a cure for cancer. As if knowing how things work isn't a great reward?!?

Civilization we call that.

Watch TV. Know nothing about the world we live in. Know everything about Britney Spears.

And then we have vegetarians claiming to have a moral high ground? Because they only kill plants to eat? Which isn't even true. We are what we are. We are a part of nature. We have evolved to have an omnivorous diet. You can see it from our teeth. You can see it from our digestive system. Fraggle rocker has explained in detail how things really are. I'm not going to repeat that.

What are we actually discussing here anyway? Human culture mainly. Memes. How easy it is to influence the human mind. How easy it is to steer it against the grain of nature.

That's all.

 

[c7ityi_]

Up until the 1970's they had no written language, no "modern" technology, and no one outside their community could speak their language.
Does that mean that they were not as self-aware or intelligent as us?

they had an advanced language like all humans. they're intelligent enough to learn english, animals are not.

all animals have a way to communicate but not even nearly as advanced as ours. for everyone who dares to use some common sense, there are countless other big mental differences between humans and animals except language.

How do you know that?

i dont know how i "know" it. that's just the way i see it.

 

[Oniw17]

I seem to remember a certain gorilla who knows sign language, and who we can communicate with. Also plants do not find and eat food, they make their food. We're working on communicating with dolphins, and whales also. We already know that dolphins have names for each other, so are they not incredibly self-aware? Your seven levels of consciousness is the most ridiculous thing that I've ever heard. It's base on nothing but your own thoughts about how conscious living things, and even non living things are, which you've admitted that you have no way of knowing. BTW you left out 4 kingdoms of living things: viruses, baterium, protists, and fungi. Apes do not write because they have not been taight to. The only reason that humans developed writing is because we developed language, which isn't because of higher intelligence, but because we can make so many sounds. You can't assume that if apes had the same vocal prowess as we did, that they wouldn't be at the same level we are at by this point. Of course humans are smarter, we have done this ourselves, but in nature I doubt that we were much smarter than apes. What's so special about writing anyway? Are you familiar with the religious teachings of Meher Baba? He believed that the rock was more aware than humans. But really, look up dolphins. They are likely just as aware as humans, and they eat meat. Also have you thought of eating meat on an evolutionary scale? Obviously the first animals would've all been herbivores because they were the first animals, and there was no animal to be hunted, unless they ate protozoans? So it can be said that herbivores are primitive. But then there's gorillas, they are very intelligent, and are most likely pretty far along on an evolutionary timeline, but they eat no meat. I have no explanation for this, perhaps they are the most primitive of the great apes. Chimpanzees and orangutangs eat meat and sometimes even small monkeys. We all know that humans eat meat, and I believe someone said on this forum something about a theory which states if we hadn't eaten meat, we wouldn't have evolved so far from the other animals. This makes a lot of sense, since we developed tools and language primarily for hunting. From those tools and that language came every advancement that we have today. There HAVE been cases of apes using tools in the wild, so it is within reason to believe that they have the ability to think of life, as the ability to interact with tools(the environment) is derived from thought about why these things exist. If apes were oblivious to philosophy, then they would never use tools, that is why people refer to philosophy as natural science.

 

[Oniw17]

Damn every time I reply there's a whole conversation between what I was talking about.

 

[c7ityi_]

and even non living things are,

nothing is non living. consciuosness is life itself.

It's base on nothing but your own thoughts about how conscious living things, and even non living things are, which you've admitted that you have no way of knowing.

i have intuition. what else would i base it on except my own thoughts? someone elses thoughts?

BTW you left out 4 kingdoms of living things: viruses, baterium, protists, and fungi.

fungi are of plant kingdom, the others are animal (or lower animal -- insect kingdom)

there is no clear distinction between matter, plants, animals and humans. the transition is smooth. the most intelligent ape or dolphin is as smart as the dumbest human. the most intelligent genius is as smart as the dumbest prophet.

Apes do not write because they have not been taight to.

try to teach them and you'll find that they will never learn.

which isn't because of higher intelligence, but because we can make so many sounds.

we can make many sounds because we have high intelligence.

I have no explanation for this, perhaps they are the most primitive of the great apes.

a gorilla can be reincarnated into a human body when he has reached the highest level as a gorilla.

 

[wsionynw]

The experiments that involve killing: Tissue culture. Organ culture. In situ's. Immuno's. Basic stuff.
To understand the basic principles that govern tooth development
Nothing of this stuff I do is going to cure cancer, or give you new teeth. It's totally pointless from a practical perspective. Although I probably could develop a method to generate new teeth if you give me enough money and time. Something that could be build upon. I just don't care.
But then again, do we just want to be ignorant monkeys that do not truly understand our world?
Personally I do not give a shit about practical research. It's all wasted. All claim to do cancer research, but hardly anyone really does it. It's just a front. To get money. Because sadly in modern society nobody is interested in our world. They are only interested in money. In finding a cure for cancer. As if knowing how things work isn't a great reward?!?
Civilization we call that.
Watch TV. Know nothing about the world we live in. Know everything about Britney Spears.
And then we have vegetarians claiming to have a moral high ground? Because they only kill plants to eat? Which isn't even true. We are what we are. We are a part of nature. We have evolved to have an omnivorous diet. You can see it from our teeth. You can see it from our digestive system. Fraggle rocker has explained in detail how things really are. I'm not going to repeat that.
What are we actually discussing here anyway? Human culture mainly. Memes. How easy it is to influence the human mind. How easy it is to steer it against the grain of nature.

That's all.

That doesn't sound like important research to me. One of the reasons most of the public back animal testing is because they're led to believe that it is vital to improving human life.

 

[Oniw17]

What are you talking about? Do you use no ration whatsoever? There are no nonliving things? Do you have any proof? Fungi are not plants, they attain food differrently. Of course you cant teach a gorilla to write, it would take eons of evolution. First you have to get them to talk. We can not make more sounds because of higher intelect, but because of more advanced vocal cords. You're backwards, the root of our intelligence is our vocal prowess. Do you know anything about Biology, or are you just talking out of your ass? It's safe to assume the latter, considering your logic makes no sense.

 

[Prince_James]

The argument is quite the valid one. For:

If it is presumed that killing is wrong under any circumstance, and -all- creatures deserve the right to live.

And that one is not vindicated in one's choice to kill animals.

And that the value of an animal is at least equatable to that of humans.

Then it stands to reason that abortion, for any reason, is unethical.

 

[Roman]

Thanks Prince.

 

[Athelwulf]

viable fetus blah blah blah are you still reading blah blah blah

What's a viable fetus? Is that like a ripe one? Cause I like mine picked early. No bones.

The manner in which you quoted me shows me that you don't take the debate you yourself brought up seriously. But just because you asked:

viable adj.
1. Capable of living, developing, or germinating under favorable conditions.
2. Capable of living outside the uterus. Used of a fetus or newborn.
3. Capable of success or continuing effectiveness; practicable: a viable plan; a viable national economy. See synonyms at possible.

I hope that helps.

And I'm not really still reading. I skimmed to be honest.

This further shows me that you don't take your debate seriously.

 

[Huwy]

report of foetus eating in china:

http://www.heretical.com/cannibal/china.html

 

[Prince_James]

I do believe that child eating story is a fraud. I have read that it was discreditted.

That being said, that is the most revolting thing I have ever read, and if that is a genuine picture, I do declare that man is a beast beyond compare.

It would not, however, shock me that Communist China would have such debasing practices.

 

[Roman]

The manner in which you quoted me shows me that you don't take the debate you yourself brought up seriously. But just because you asked:

I don't take you seriously.

I hope that helps.

It does, thanks. So tell me, are diabetics "viable"? What about old people on oxygen tanks?

This further shows me that you don't take your debate seriously.

I take my debate seriously. That doesn't mean I take everyone elses claptrapping seriously.

 

[Roman]

Actually, I think water's the only person in this whole thread to have made any real points. Or good points. She's the only one who presented take-away material, anyhow.

Thanks water!

 

[TW Scott]

That positions entirely erroneous, if youre saying anything that doesnt have our self awareness is fair game, then why not use retarded kids for medical experimentation or a source of food too?
And before you say...'oh but we wouldnt want to upset their parents' lets assume theyre orphans.

I have known several mentally handicapped people and all of them are as self awre as you or I. This would lead me to conclude that even the most sever case would has the capacity for the same self awareness. However very few species of animals have shown the same.

 

[wsionynw]

the most intelligent genius is as smart as the dumbest prophet.
QUOTE]

That's a joke, right?

 

[wsionynw]

I have known several mentally handicapped people and all of them are as self awre as you or I. This would lead me to conclude that even the most sever case would has the capacity for the same self awareness. However very few species of animals have shown the same.

The issue is not how self aware or intelligent an animal or human is, it is their capacity to feel pain and suffer. In this respect animals deserve just as much consideration as humans.

 

[TW Scott]

The issue is not how self aware or intelligent an animal or human is, it is their capacity to feel pain and suffer. In this respect animals deserve just as much consideration as humans.

So you forgo even eating plants? I doubt it. That issue is moot. Every living thing percieves suffering in some way. Using that as a moral guide is akin to saying everything blue is actually red. It is nonsensical.