#Weird unrelated argument about veganism or something
floral siren
You guys can chat here instead
golden patio
Humans are sapient, they aren’t even close to the level of any life stock
fathom jacinth
idk what u mean by sapient
u mean smart?
golden patio
It’s a cognitive level that allows for self awareness and moral judgment beyond a normal animal
Humans are the only known animal to be currently sapient
fathom jacinth
you can't knwo for sure if other minds are sentient just like you can't know for 100% sure other animals aren't sentient,,
fathom jacinth
Humans are the only known animal to be currently sapient
sapient just means wise
golden patio
Sentient sure
fathom jacinth
according to google anyway
anyway you seem to be advocating for holocausting mentally disabled people
golden patio
Sentience isn’t the same, sentient animals don’t create thier own code of law
golden patio
anyway you seem to be advocating for holocausting mentally disabled people
Where did that come from
fathom jacinth
if some guy had the same intelligence as a pig you'd be fine with holocausting them?
so a 3 year old
for example
golden patio
I don’t see how you can draw that conclusion
fathom jacinth
bc ur saying the difference is being intelligent
golden patio
But the value of a persons potential is definitely a factor of value in life
The maximum potential of a pig at 1 or 11 is the same
A child isn’t a fully formed person so their potential isn’t recognised yet
fathom jacinth
or a disabled human then
golden patio
Disabled humans are still sapient
fathom jacinth
If a disabled human had the same intelligence as a pig, they wouldn't be able to make their own code of law or whatever
golden patio
Probably not
How does this tie into farming exactly
fathom jacinth
bc i think it's unethical to farm animals for the same reason i think its unethical to farm humans , u were tryna make justifications like differences between humans and animals so i applied the same trait differences to humans (and the humans u mentioned actually exist, like disabled ppl) to see if u were consistent with ur logic
golden patio
bc i think it's unethical to farm animals for the same reason i think its unethi...
The big difference that farming your own species is extremely bad dietary and also considered as canibalism a practise that had its entire own moral justification
fathom jacinth
ok but look if you wanna make that the difference then you're going to have to say that if eating humans was not bad for you, then it'd be okay to kill them for food
golden patio
I don’t know how you could even make an argument for farming your own species
fathom jacinth
and btw, eating bacon isn't exactly healthy for you is it
golden patio
Cannibalism has a plethora of bad effects compared to bacon
golden patio
ok but look if you wanna make that the difference then you're going to have to s...
Even if it was it’s the peak of an obvious ethical violation
fathom jacinth
yeah and i don't see how animals are different in a way where it's justified to treat them like the way that we do for food
golden patio
Because they are lesser valued potential
fathom jacinth
unless you mean animals which aren't actually conscious like i believe some
golden patio
No even conscious
It’s an obvious hierarchy where humans are way above and then you work your way down to single cells
floral siren
Shawarma is really tasty
golden patio
Shawarma is really tasty
Brooo
floral siren
What's up
golden patio
He was on a revelation and you derailed him
floral siren
Was he really
golden patio
He was just about to tell me how eating the disabled is fine
Not even kidding
I’d eat it
fathom jacinth
He was just about to tell me how eating the disabled is fine
no,
floral siren
Don't post shit like that 😄 @fathom jacinth
fathom jacinth
i was using your lgoic
golden patio
Not the disabled the image is gone
fathom jacinth
Don't post shit like that 😄 <@922710882386079814>
lmao
golden patio
No you weren’t , you were using a slippery slope argument
fathom jacinth
it's insane how deluded u are
no, i wasn't
golden patio
How so
fathom jacinth
i wasn't making a slippery slope argument ,i was using the logical conclusion of the trait difference you said
fathom jacinth
Don't post shit like that 😄 <@922710882386079814>
dead animals is fine as long as they're not dogs!
floral siren
As long as they're not pets and as long as they're pretty typical sources of food
You got it!
golden patio
Yes, you said because I think eating animals lower on our hierarchy of status is applied then the disabled somehow lie in that approximation
floral siren
See, he does understand logic
golden patio
Which is nonsense
fathom jacinth
As long as they're not pets and as long as they're pretty typical sources of foo...
but dogs are a typical source of food there
floral siren
No they're not
golden patio
Eating dog is outlawed that’s why you can’t post that
fathom jacinth
yes they are. they have a whole festival celibrating dog eating
floral siren
No they don't
golden patio
China is putting a ban on it too
fathom jacinth
just look up the yulin dog festival
golden patio
Yum
Seems like low yield on such an animal, wasted resources tbh
fathom jacinth
there's always going to be a waste of resources when you're eating animals because you have to feed them grains that we could eat directly so there's a loss of energy
floral siren
The festival is a relatively recent event, not rooted in tradition, but rather created in 2010 by dog traders to increase their profits. Prior to its inception, Yulin had no historical background of engaging in mass dog slaughter and consumption.
golden patio
Yes as with everything but you lose a tonne less with chicken and cow etc
fathom jacinth
>>> The festival is a relatively recent event, not rooted in tradition, but rath...
lol, okay? it's still a typical source of food there
floral siren
No it's not.
golden patio
Chickens eat grain and foods we don’t eat, same with cow
floral siren
Stop spreading misinformation.
golden patio
Stop spreading misinformation.
Either way it’s not really about whether it’s done or not
fathom jacinth
and btw, i don't see how it being typical justifies it. if it were typical to buy cp, would it be okay?
golden patio
and btw, i don't see how it being typical justifies it. if it were typical to bu...
Bro what
floral siren
Oh that's definitely not a topic you want to fuck with
fathom jacinth
Stop spreading misinformation.
in china 10-20 million dogs are killed each year for food
floral siren
You should probably be careful about what you say moving forward lmao
fathom jacinth
it's just the logical entailment of your argument
floral siren
No it's not
golden patio
It’s really not
floral siren
You have a habit of trying to force your shit on other people's opinions
golden patio
You understand that you’re creating hypothetical about things that are not related
fathom jacinth
it is if your argument is "if it's typical then it's ethical"
golden patio
it is if your argument is "if it's typical then it's ethical"
That’s not what I said at any point
fathom jacinth
if it's not that, then i don't see what your argument is for saying posting dead dogs is bad but posting other dog animals like pig is okay?
that seemss like what you were saying
golden patio
if it's not that, then i don't see what your argument is for saying posting dead...
It’s outlawed so would be against the law in many countries this server pertains with
Same way posting drug use
floral siren
I'm going to be very clear. If all you care to do here is argue, especially about completely off topic shit like this, as well as attempt to provoke users, you're going to be muted.
fathom jacinth
It’s outlawed so would be against the law in many countries this server pertains...
hate to break it to you but it's not outlawed to post pictures of dead dogs
it's also not outlawed to eat dogs where i live which is the uk
and a lot of other places
floral siren
hate to break it to you but it's not outlawed to post pictures of dead dogs
I recommend you don't. You can see what happens if you do but really, probably don't.
I'm giving you fair warning.
Also avoid saying that 😄
Look man, you keep saying some pretty crazy shit.
I recommend you probably chill with that
golden patio
It’s illegal to sell it in the uk
fathom jacinth
I think I'm the only sane one here
golden patio
What are you on about
fathom jacinth
It’s illegal to sell it in the uk
yeah i know, that doesn't mean it's illegal to kill ur dog and eat it
floral siren
You're free to think whatever you want bud
golden patio
yeah i know, that doesn't mean it's illegal to kill ur dog and eat it
It is illegal to kill a pet under the animal welfare act
fathom jacinth
It is illegal to kill a pet under the animal welfare act
no, it isn't, it's legal to kill your dog or cat as long as it's "humane"
golden patio
no, it isn't, it's legal to kill your dog or cat as long as it's "humane"
You mean euthanasia?
fathom jacinth
no i mean for food
golden patio
You cannot under the animal welfare act kill with that intention
Unless you are getting the animal as livestock and not a pet
Regardless what Is this to do with anything to do with ethics
fathom jacinth
Regardless what Is this to do with anything to do with ethics
i agree that legality and morality are separate things, you or the other guy was trying to make this argument, not me
golden patio
Im aware
Definitely derailed
fathom jacinth
well, i don't know. morality is subjective. if you're going to say that legality is what makes things moral or immoral then I'm going to have to argue against that since that's your position
golden patio
I don’t argue that
Legality and morality are two separate things
Morality enforces legality however
Which both change over time
floral siren
My argument is don't post pictures of dead dogs and stop being a nuisance
That's the entirety of it.
Don't extrapolate any other points from it.
fathom jacinth
My argument is don't post pictures of dead dogs and stop being a nuisance
can you stop posting pictures of animal abuse too then?
floral siren
Don't say "oh so you mean you support x-"
No, I don't support whatever the fuck
Don't post pictures of dead dogs
fathom jacinth
Don't say "oh so you mean you support x-"
don't point out a reductio of an argument?
floral siren
Period, end of discussion
Continue on, boys
fathom jacinth
How am I supposed to argue about morality without using reductios of someone's ethical framework?
floral siren
That's a you problem
golden patio
Because a reduction removes the caveats
fathom jacinth
That's on you to explain the caveats then
golden patio
I do?
You make great leaps with logic
fathom jacinth
they aren't leaps, they're logical entailments
I could formalise the argument
golden patio
Far more than a generous argument should
fathom jacinth
and prove it mathematically
golden patio
Do you drink water
fathom jacinth
yes
golden patio
Oh so you drink sea water
That’s the logic leaps you are making
fathom jacinth
How do you derive the conclusion "you drink sea water" from "you drink water"?
that's not logically entailed
floral siren
Are you a troll
fathom jacinth
no, the proposition "person a drinks sea water" does not logically entail the conclusion "person a drinks sea water"
floral siren
I personally think the jump to claiming he supports genocide is a tough sell
golden patio
Clearly not a leap at all
floral siren
A much tougher sell than drinking sea water
fathom jacinth
Yes, that is a logical entailment because:
You said the difference between humans and animals that you eat that justifies holocausting animals and not humans is that humans have higher intelligence.
This entails that if a human had the same intelligence as an animal that you eat (for example a mentally disabled human who has the same degree of intelligence as a pig), then it'd be justified to holocaust that human
floral siren
counterargument: no
Damn, seems like this argument reached it's logical end
time to wrap it up then boys
golden patio
I genuinely don’t know how you can draw that conclusion based on what I said unless you’re arguing in horrible faith
floral siren
or not, I don't really care
but will, you're crazy
fathom jacinth
I genuinely don’t know how you can draw that conclusion based on what I said unl...
I literally just explained it, do you want me to formalise the argument for you?
golden patio
No because I don’t think that it’s really worth arguing with someone who has such limited grasp on language
fathom jacinth
limited grasp on language?
golden patio
If that’s really what you draw from words then you are playing a dangerous game my friend
fathom jacinth
Your argument was "it's ok to harm and slaughter beings with low intelligence, but not the ones with high intelligence"
This has the conclusion "It's ok to harm and slaughter mentally handicapped people (low intelligence)."
golden patio
Reference sapient in that to see how the context of how words used matters
fathom jacinth
If your argument wasn't that, then what was it? What do you mean by sapience if not intelligence?
golden patio
Reference how I explained sapience in great detail
fathom jacinth
You didn't . You just said the ability to create their own code of law
golden patio
Reference canibalism
There are so many things that explains the opposite of your inference
fathom jacinth
Okay, so it's not sapience? You change your position to it's wrong because it's cannibalism?
golden patio
It’s both
fathom jacinth
Okay,
golden patio
Bro how are you not actually processing what I’ve said to formulate a better argument
floral siren
hey so I didn't want to waste anymore of the few braincells I had left explaining why will is so bad at arguing
fathom jacinth
So do you recognise what the logical entailment of that is? I don't know if I'm even allowed to say it beause of Gary.
floral siren
so I had chatgpt do it instead
for context
Straw Man Fallacy:
Will accuses AReplaceableEntity of advocating for the holocaust of mentally disabled people, which is a misrepresentation of AReplaceableEntity's position. This is a classic example of a straw man fallacy, where someone distorts an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.
False Equivalence:Will equates the intelligence of a mentally disabled person or a child with that of a pig, suggesting that if AReplaceableEntity's logic justifies the killing of pigs, it should also justify the killing of these humans. This is a false equivalence because it ignores the broader context of human rights, societal values, and ethical considerations that differentiate humans from animals.
Appeal to Emotion:By mentioning the holocaust and suggesting that AReplaceableEntity's logic could justify such atrocities, Will is appealing to the audience's emotions rather than engaging with the actual argument. This is known as an appeal to emotion fallacy, which distracts from rational discussion.
Lack of Nuanced Understanding:Will's argument shows a lack of understanding of the difference between sapience (self-awareness, moral judgment) and sentience (capacity to feel, perceive). AReplaceableEntity tries to explain this distinction, but Will conflates the two concepts.
Slippery Slope Fallacy:Will implies that accepting AReplaceableEntity's view on animal sapience leads to accepting extreme and unrelated consequences (e.g., killing mentally disabled people). This is a slippery slope fallacy, where a relatively small first step is assumed to lead to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect.
Ignoring Ethical Frameworks:Ethical discussions often rely on established frameworks that consider a variety of factors, including autonomy, consent, societal impact, and intrinsic value of beings. Will's argument ignores these frameworks and simplifies the issue to intelligence alone.
golden patio
Oh damn that’s a good summary ngl
Didn’t know it could do screenshots
floral siren
it's really good art parsing images now yeah
golden patio
Oh nice I might give it a go
floral siren
the formatting got lost on copy paste
but yeah
fathom jacinth
I really don't want to refute every single AI thing you throw at me
Pick your argument
floral siren
that's okay because I just refuted everything you've said for the last hour
fathom jacinth
Name one thing you refuted
floral siren
your method of arguing is extremely flawed and harmful
fathom jacinth
Give me your best reason why
floral siren
> Straw Man Fallacy:
>
> Will accuses AReplaceableEntity of advocating for the ...
re-read this as many times as you need to understand
golden patio
It’s just so many textbook examples of bad reasoning tbh
floral siren
I'm not elaborating further
it's all there
fathom jacinth
Right well I'll just refute one of these points then
floral siren
fathom jacinth
" This is a false equivalence because it ignores the broader context of human rights, societal values, and ethical considerations that differentiate humans from animals." This is ignoring the argument that was given to me.
I was using the traits named, he did not bring thsoe up
floral siren
I mean give it your best shot but it analyzed you to a tee
fathom jacinth
It’s both
Now let me actually argue against this please
floral siren
I don't think you're climbing out of that hole
fathom jacinth
Have you got any more traits?
Or is it just sapience and cannibalisam?
Because I'm suspecting you want more traits now you realise there is a negative entailment from just those things
Or do you want to run with just those 2 traits?
golden patio
Im going to bed, no offence but you’re legitimately the closest I’ve met to a Redditor moron
fathom jacinth
Okay, well I'll just run the entailment of the traits you mentioned:
If there's a mentally disabled human-like animal, who had every single trait of a human except for some genetic cluster which put him outside of the species classification of homo sapien, then it's justified to holocaust them
(classifying species is hard btw. so it's not even entirely clear what you mean by cannibalism, so this is why i'm saying some genetic cluster)
There could also be the entailment of some alien species
if you've ever seen star-trek
there's that human like race
eating them would not be cannibalism
floral siren
I didn't give it the context about cannibalism so it might be slightly off on that part but
It figured out your reductio ad absurdum tactic
that's pretty amusing
fathom jacinth
It figured out your reductio ad absurdum tactic
yeah this is a valid and logical argument when it comes to debating morality
floral siren
No it's not
so like... yeah
fathom jacinth
but keep using your gpt
floral siren
we're done here
I will, because actually engaging with you in an argument is like grinding my teeth against sandpaper
fathom jacinth
No it's not
yes, it is. reductio ad absurdum just means some bad logical entailment of an argument that you assume the opponent would not hold
floral siren
and if you want to know why, please refer to everything above
I'm going to close up the thread since we're done talking about this
fathom jacinth
it's a valid form of argument