No to Fake Meat

[Ignatius A]

My explanation of what? We're talking about your statement.

It was a question. It had nothing to do with humans or anything in cages.


There are no guns in my question. But even if you had one, there's no guarantee you're going to win against a lion.

Brute strength. Giant claws. Huge teeth and mouth.

This questions makes no sense at all.

This was in response to your question, "I will ask you AGAIN what is the need to reduce humans to the level of other animals?"

Humans are animals. It's a pretty basic fact of reality.


Try sticking to the topic at hand, rather than jumping all over the place.

Also, try answering a question once in a while. It will facilitate a smoother conversation.

And Im taking about your explanation.

All of this because you dont want to hurt the lions feelings?

What havent I answered? I probably have but you just didnt like the answer. Not the same thing.

Btw you dont dictate how and what I say.

 

[Ignatius A]

My explanation of what? We're talking about your statement.

It was a question. It had nothing to do with humans or anything in cages.


There are no guns in my question. But even if you had one, there's no guarantee you're going to win against a lion.

Brute strength. Giant claws. Huge teeth and mouth.

This questions makes no sense at all.

This was in response to your question, "I will ask you AGAIN what is the need to reduce humans to the level of other animals?"

Humans are animals. It's a pretty basic fact of reality.


Try sticking to the topic at hand, rather than jumping all over the place.

Also, try answering a question once in a while. It will facilitate a smoother conversation.

You also realize dont you that I could name my dog, "Stupid" and call him that every single day and every time i walked in the door he'd be just as "happy" to see me? Not because he is stupid but because he isn't capable of being offended by words like some people are when i.say their dog doesn't love them.

 

[We Never Know]

Sure it does. Just because we are animals doesn't mean we arent superior and more valuable. Why is this a problem for you? What's the need for reducing humans to the level of other animals?

Humans could disappear from earth and earth and 99.999% of the other species would be better off.

We are the most destructive, killing, polluting, wastefull, deadly, habitat destroying, etc species that has ever existed.

In all honestly we are the worse species so far that has ever existed. Being more evolved doesn't make us special/better.

 

[Secret Chief]

Humans could disappear from earth and earth and 99.999% of the other species would be better off.

We are the most destructive, killing, polluting, wastefull, deadly, habitat destroying, etc species that has ever existed.

In all honestly we are the worse species so far that has ever existed. Being more evolved doesn't make us special/better.

I agree. We act no better than animals! Oh, wait...

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sure I do. It's an objective fact that the devices we are using to communicate with one another were not created by lower animals. We humans are superior to and more valuable than other animals.

Cool. Do you understand the difference between "humans made communication devices" and "humans are superior"?

Here's a clue: one is an objective statement of fact, the other is a subjective statement of opinion (dependent on context). Can you tell me which?

Why is there a need to reduce humans to the level of inferior animals?

Why do you feel the need to raise humans to the level of superior to animals? You seem a wee bit defensive.

I'll ask again: just how superior do you think you would be to a shark, if you were dropped in the middle of the ocean? And no, I don't think a phone would be able to help you much.

 

[Ignatius A]

Cool. Do you understand the difference between "humans made communication devices" and "humans are superior"?

Here's a clue: one is an objective statement of fact, the other is a subjective statement of opinion (dependent on context). Can you tell me which?


Why do you feel the need to raise humans to the level of superior to animals? You seem a wee bit defensive.

I'll ask again: just how superior do you think you would be to a shark, if you were dropped in the middle of the ocean? And no, I don't think a phone would be able to help you much.

Humans are superior. If that offends you and your dog then I guess you're offended.

Drop a shark in the middle of my yard, how superior would be be? What's wrong with you? This ridiculous line of reasoning that humans can only be superior if they hard superior in all things is illogical at best.

 

[Subduction Zone]

To me means that it is subjective to me. In this case you.

Which also means that it is not a fact. A fact has to be demonstrable. And I do not see anyone demonstrating their "facts" here.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Humans are superior. If that offends you and your dog then I guess you're offended.

Drop a shark in the middle of my yard, how superior would be be? What's wrong with you? This ridiculous line of reasoning that humans can only be superior if they hard superior in all things is illogical at best.

Yeah, here is a sentence for one version of "are". The leeves on the tree are green. But your "are" is not the same.
Your "are" is this definition in effect: to equal in meaning : have the same connotation as
I.e. to be a human means to be superior over other animals.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Which also means that it is not a fact. A fact has to be demonstrable. And I do not see anyone demonstrating their "facts" here.

No, we are doing different versions of what subjectively matters.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's not subjective to me at all.

And that was an admission that it is subjective. You should at least try to understand the terms that you use. I can understand holding such a belief. I will not even say that it is wrong. But if someone wants to claim that something is true that person has taken on a burden of proof. "True to me" is only admitting that it is not true since that two needs to be demonstrable.

 

[Ignatius A]

Yeah, here is a sentence for one version of "are". The leeves on the tree are green. But your "are" is not the same.
Your "are" is this definition in effect: to equal in meaning : have the same connotation as
I.e. to be a human means to be superior over other animals.

It sure is the same. Humans ARE superior to other a animals. AGAIN. if that offends you and your dog then you should talk to a mental health professional. On second thought they probably think they are inferior too.

 

[Ignatius A]

No, we are doing different versions of what subjectively matters.

Right. It's your opinion that you're on the same level as your dog.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It sure is the same. Humans ARE superior to other a animals. AGAIN. if that offends you and your dog then you should talk to a mental health professional. On second thought they probably think they are inferior too.

How can you support that claim? You would need a specific metric and also you would need to be able to defend that metric.

Making claims and refusing to support them when challenged is no different than admitting that you are wrong.

 

[Ignatius A]

How can you support that claim? You would need a specific metric and also you would need to be able to defend that metric.

Making claims and refusing to support them when challenged is no different than admitting that you are wrong.

I have supported the claim. Go get the computer your dog invented. Too much? Yeah probably. Go get the pencil your dog created. Still too much? Go get anything your dog created other then his excrement.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I have supported the claim. Go get the computer your dog invented. Too much? Yeah probably. Go get the pencil your dog created. Still too much? Go get anything your dog created other then his excrement.

Don't you understand the difference between what is and how it matters?

 

[Ignatius A]

Don't you understand the difference between what is and how it matters?

I understand you haven't shown me anything your dog has created except his excrement.

What most amazes me is how for the past 2 or 3 days you people have so vociferously insisted you're no better than your dogs. It's quite fascinating.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I understand you haven't shown me anything your dog has created except his excrement.

What most amazes me is how for the past 2 or 3 days you people have so vociferously insisted you're no better than your dogs. It's quite fascinating.

Well, just as you defend your subjective position.

 

[Ignatius A]

Well, just as you defend your subjective position.

No it's quite clear I'm spot on. I'm just waiting to see what your dog has created.

You have spent days trying to convince me you're no better then your dog. It's fascinating to me but maybe you're onto something with that.

 

[Kathryn]

And that was an admission that it is subjective. You should at least try to understand the terms that you use. I can understand holding such a belief. I will not even say that it is wrong. But if someone wants to claim that something is true that person has taken on a burden of proof. "True to me" is only admitting that it is not true since that two needs to be demonstrable.

I am simply disinclined to try to prove this to anyone.

 

[Ignatius A]

I am simply disinclined to try to prove this to anyone.

It's amazing isn't it that we have reached a time in history where we have to actually convince humans they are better than other animals and they adamantly reject it. Common sense has been sacrificed on the altar of credentialism. I'm no longer sure how people know when to pee if they aren't a urologist or don't consult one. This is how "smart" we have become.