NSRXN @ nsrxn @scribe.disroot.org

About

---

Read more

Posts

2

Comments

73

Joined

3 mo. ago

obviously we disagree. i hold them accountable for their actions regardless.

Declaring that humans and chickens are distinct is not sufficient to say to they deserve radically different ethical consideration.

it is. ethics are a social construct developed by humans to help them understand correct action in human society. chickens are only relevant to the extent that it impacts how people relate to one another

You could for instance, use that to say any group of humans are distinct in some way and thus deserve different moral consideration. Be it by gender, skin tone, etc.

comparing women to animals is what misogynists do. comparing other races to animals is what racists do. lets be better than them.

this is storytelling, not evidence. if we can't agree that meat producers have free will, and i am only responsible for my own actions, we have a fundamental disagreement that won't be resolved on lemmy. but ask yourself: at what point do meat producers become responsible for tehir own actions?

meat producers are responsible for their own actions. no one else causes them.

i have considered it, and its epistemic issues make it impractical as a basis of deciding correct actions.

nope. I've said what I wanted to say.

well after the revolution, we (anarchists) need to understand the counterrevolutionary mindset of statists as much as statists need to understand (what they call) counterrevolutionaries

if you're a leninist you really should read Galleani

I've seen NTT before. I know exactly what's going on. anybody who reads this is welcome to decide which of us is being more dishonest.

as I said, I won't be answering your question. it's a fallacious line of reasoning.

it's been ages since I've seen someone trot out "name the trait" or ntt, so forgive me if I'm a bit rusty.

ntt is a form argument that devolves to the spectrum fallacy or line drawing fallacy. basically, it is clear that humans have a set of traits, and chickens have a set of traits, and we can create a human-chicken spectrum. being unable to point to which part of the spectrum you go from human to chicken or vice versa, being unable to draw a line, does not negate the fact that people are not chickens and chickens are not people.

so I won't be answering your direct question

I'm not a utilitarian. most people aren't

I'm for equality of people

great.

the same people trying to kill section 230

first of all, I don't kill animals, except pests or by accident.

second, how can animals deserve... anything?

eating meat isn't cruel

I think a lot of people stopped listening to the rad libs like Maddow and became disaffected from the Democrats since then. those folks are (at least around me) engaging in more radical acts of resistance than the marching-and-shouting that dominated the public actions of that time. so while buttegieg probably hasn't shifted much, and might think he's still talking to those same people, many of them are no longer listening.

I think his audience has shifted

2018 was a different time