schopenhauer1

You asked if we have obligation to save wild animals from natural disasters...@"Bitter Crank" seems to be implying we do. Ok.

Cool, then he thus refuted your idea that we have no obligation to the natural world, cause that is what he is saying.

Perhaps you are right. That would still make @"Isaac" not right.

Granted, but I am saying humans are not obligated to them as they are directly to animals under their care. Is it a good idea to look after the natura...

It is what those properties mean.. the semantics. Blondes and redheads is a distinction that makes no difference morally. Beings who can reason and be...

So it occurs to me as I wrote something on another thread that one of the pessimistic outcomes of the behemoth technology that is our modern world is ...

Because there is a distinction with the "natural world" and the human world. The natural world is that which does its thing without human (beings who ...

Thanks.. Because I like having clean drinking water, construction codes, educational institutions offered to everyone, safety nets, courts of law, pol...

Because were are not kings with dominion over the earth with all animals as our subjects for protection. That's an odd and antiquated way of looking a...

Because nothing happens in a vacuum. Political development is tied in with historical development. We were never in a "state of nature" that is a thou...

Well, we should try to if they are in our protection.

This is just bad reasoning. Ethics can only go human-to-animal, and not animal-to-human or animal-to-animal as it is obvious most animals cannot, by t...

I believe a refuted your argument in my last post so I’m not sure there’s much to say.

You are not the only one who gets to attack bucko. Sometimes you gotta move your queen back a space.

You were the one refuting my claims against the naturalistic fallacy (ancestors etc). Thus I refuted that refutation. When arguing someone in good fai...

Stalling. I was critiquing your ancestors theory. I don’t wanna rehash the same type of arguments but in the form of vegetarian or what not instead of...

I’m arguing against your position, so it has quite a lot to do with this debate between me and you. This. One. Right. Here.

:lol: :wink: You forgot to direct that to Isaac. He’s pro suffering all around as long as everyone’s up for it.

We’ve been though this before. You are for ethics being anything that the community decides is right. So if the community is 56% pro slavery, it’s rig...

Yes, that’s the point. We cannot move on from this setup and rules. We cannot resign and move to a different version. If you rather the treadmill anal...

It's morally wrong to put someone in a situation where you either "play this game or kill yourself". That is a tragic thing. Yes, it is indeed the cas...

No I don't see it. One doesn't involve killing, one does. Add in "highly sentient" adjective there as well. I see the distinction, and you apparently ...

Right, so I still don't get why there is much of an argument pro-Putin or whatnot.

Understand.. But even if this is wrong, let's say.. The wrong right now is Russia's actual invasion. Not just soft influence. Here's the difference.. ...

Ok agreed. Because I don't see the equivalency of taking a walk in the park and killing certain highly sentient animals. I'm not sure why you are play...

Um, so like the OP is stating.. In a game like chess.. You can play it and if you want to resign, you can move on. You can't do that with the "game of...

Yep, what you say here makes sense. So, the underlying premise seems to be "If a large country views its neighbor as its dependent client state, it is...

But it’s not the norm that animals are raised this way (nice pastures, good food, etc). Also, if you can survive without eating meat, why do it other ...

Then this isn't arguing anything contra my moral argument. It is simply a description that fetuses develop and become babies. Then, I am not sure the ...

Well said. :up:

Yeah Putin/Russian military is killing people to gain territory. How is that disputed? Where is the dispute? Why is it the US being castigated for Put...

The point is you are not forced to play chess lest you kill yourself.

But at the end of the day, isn’t Putin/Russian military killing people to gain territory? How is that disputed?

Ah gotcha, war profiteering. It’s all staged so that military industrial complex makes money they’re saying?

Just saying, I wonder what the controversy is? Appeasing or not appeasing right?

Appeasement was the lesson of WW2 wasnt it? Or do nukes plus uncertainty change everything?

My previous post still remains my reply. And this is explicitly the naturalistic fallacy as stated in last post Life that leads to a person with self-...

It’s simply custom that we use to allow for transactions to go smoothly. Kant had a point. A society where nothing is believed, is a poorly run societ...

You are using “throw” as some literal term. It just means starting someone else’s life on the treadmill. Equivocating the fact that babies can’t reaso...

Life striving to live you said etc

That’s great but doesn’t quite capture human like (I.e a self-aware being that has reasons).

That’s good because that’s exactly my point. You start a treadmill that the person can by it’s nature cannot be ended without simply death. There is n...

That’s more social conditioning. Babies don’t decide things yet. We tend to get hungry and fear scary stimuli. But to equate that with a reason for em...

That’s also the point. There is no better version of the game of life (inter-worldly affairs) and so all you can do is kill yourself if you don’t like...

No, a parent wanted a life. A decision was had based on a reason. We are a species with reasons. I had a whole thread on this which poster @"Banno" an...

Request denied. Imagine having the possibility for no choice though. I mean I could have complied :wink:. Not in the case of life. Comply or die. And ...

Really? If humans live in society and people don’t like the workings of society, isn’t that rejecting life? All the people who reject society refute t...

Tread or die.. Don't tread on me.

But that's the point. Intra-worldly, you exchange games. The treadmill continues or you die. There is no reprieve from the treadmill.. There is no tim...

You might not be far off. I believe Schopenhauer's best selling books were his essays and aphorisms that are found under the title Studies in Pessimis...