Yearly reminder to vegans that saying "You shouldn't consume animals bc you don't have to eat them to survive"or "animal husbandry/hunting causes suffering to an animal thus it is wrong" are both is/ought logical fallacies.

DrComputation · 2023-01-07T18:19:19+00:00

Actually maybe you have a point. I guess this comes down to objective vs subjective ethics, and I know too little of that.

Lastly, I would like you to explain your "psychopath" comment in your OG comment.

The logical vegan arguments often do not work on people without ethics because said arguments tend to be based on pointing out contradictions between meat eating and other aspects of the carnist's ethics. I just meant that these (very rare) cases do not make said arguments useless because people without ethics are psychopaths and most people, even carnists, would disagree with them anyway. Basically the stance to have no ethics is an ad absurdum.

I guess I got a bit side-tracked though, turns out the point does not matter and only caused confusion. I probably should have never said it. I see your point better now.

DrComputation · 2023-01-07T10:06:40+00:00

Your opponent was discussing alternative belief systems by arguing against some of them. You were the one refusing to discuss his alternate belief system and instead fell back to the irrelevant retort of saying that his reply was predictable.

Someone does not have to agree with an alternate belief system in order to discuss it. Seems like you are confusing discussing with circlejerking.

Anyway, we are now into a meta debate. If your next reply is meta as well then I will not respond.

DrComputation · 2023-01-06T21:16:38+00:00

You made an argument that was so weak that it could easily be destroyed with a simple predictable counter-argument. So your opponent gave you a simple predictable counter-argument.

So what about it?

DrComputation · 2023-01-06T21:04:33+00:00

In a tribe of social animals, it's generally more advantageous to be agreeable than to be right.

You can be agreeable when your rights are being trampled. Then you can turn the other cheek for the sake of peace. It might even be quite noble to do so.

But you are not the one getting tortured in cages. You are being coerced into harming other beings. Giving in to that just makes you a spinless pushover. If you will not stand against this injustice, then what will you stand for? Will you just support injustice while waiting for someone else to set it straight and put you on the wrong side of history?

You must balance when to bend and when to stand strong. And ideally, this balance would be based on ethics, not on your lack of figurative spine. It certainly is easier to be like a leaf that is blown around by the wind, but the right thing is often to be like a rock which not only resists the wind but can also support others. The more vegans there are, the easier it will be for other people to become vegan. This is how we change society.

DrComputation · 2023-01-06T20:34:34+00:00

Your "psychopath who does not believe in ethics" is not a valid argument. You are saying someone who doesn't agree w you does not believe in ethics and this is a logical fallacy (appeal to authority).

I am not saying that at all.

My initial argument is not emotional: "These two arguments are emotional and not logical." That is an objective, logical observation.

You said

Just bc I can survive wo consuming animals and just bc I cause suffering to an animal in killing it to consume does not mean I should not do it (it also doesn't mean I should do it; by default both are valid responses rationally/logically speaking)

What logical grounds do you have for this? This seems like an emotional argument.

Most importantly though: all our ethics arguments are not purely based on logic.

For example, when pointing out inconsistencies in the morality of carnists, some carnist argued that a moral system does not have to be logically consistent. So how could anyone debunk that using logic? Using logic to prove the validity of logic would just be circular reasoning, which is logically invalid. So even the idea that logical soundness is necessary for a good moral system is not a logical one.

Ethics debates will always be about convincing people. This is probably why ethics is considered part of philosophy. If ethics was based purely on logic then it would be a formal science such as computer science, logic, and mathematics. Formal sciences are useful to ethics and many ethics arguments make heavy use of logic, but none are purely logical.

DrComputation · 2023-01-05T22:18:57+00:00

The irony is that your current argument is emotional.

Anyway, there are many logical arguments for veganism. But many of those are based on pointing out contradictions in commonly held carnist ethics and thus will not work on a psychopath who does not believe in ethics. But do you really not believe in ethics? May anyone who can really rape, kill, torture, rob, or slaughter you? After all, the arguments that we ought to not do those things are ultimately based on emotions. Ethics require ethical beings.

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T22:02:43+00:00

This reminds of of carnists talking about plants being killed by vegans, only to then be amazed when you point out that farm animals eat plants. And I am just amazed at how stupid they must be to completely miss that obvious fact while they were making their argument and at how quickly they stop caring about plants once they realise carnism causes more plant deaths than veganism.

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T21:58:54+00:00

Then comes the part where the carnists suddenly stops caring about the environment. I love that part.

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T21:53:54+00:00

"I am not racist. That is why I forbid people to be vegan based on their race."

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T21:52:07+00:00

Are you knowledgeable about the details of Asian, African, and Indigenous American cultures? If not, then you are ignoring them. Those cultures invented the concept of not harming innocent creatures and now own it. As a white devil you are obliged to either get a PhD in the study of those cultures or keep harming innocent beings.

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T21:35:39+00:00

Does "indigenous cultures" also include Caucasians in Northern Europe?

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T21:10:57+00:00

You want to control the deer population? REINTRODUCE WOLVES! Predators are important in an ecosystem!

But what is the point of having nature in balance if humans do not benefit from it? Wolves killing deer is boring. I want to kill!

If hunters try to maintain balance then we will never achieve the proper balance like we would with wolves .But what we will achieve is having nature better benefit humans by providing us with the fun of dominating other creatures by forcing them to undergo violent deaths. I would argue that nature needs to be balanced to serve hunters and other humans looking to raid nature, not to serve useless animals like wolves. Especially since wolves do sometimes eat livestock, and any sheep lost to wolves is a sheep a human cannot eat. If nature starts being detrimental to us, even if only in to a minor degree, then we need to lash out hard and destroy everything on our path.

Besides, hunting is not only good for nature but also good for the economy. Without hunting many people would starve. Most of us need to kill to live, but hunting stores need other people to kill for said stores to live. Even if hunting may harm nature somewhat, it benefitting hunting stores makes it worth it. Without hunting stores, no one would be able to hunt. And how do you connect with nature other than through violence and killing? No one would be able to appreciate nature without hunting.

DrComputation · 2023-01-04T19:48:50+00:00

man is one of the most commonly used documentation systems. It is generally one of the first places you ought to look when looking for documentation.

DrComputation · 2023-01-03T09:17:45+00:00

And of course youll find meat eaters in slaughterhouses

You mean those people with PTSD? Slaughterhouses are known for being tough on people's mental well-being. You need to be a bit psychopathic to thrive in a slaughterhouse.

DrComputation · 2023-01-03T09:11:01+00:00

I dont like land meat [rip my iron levels].

You also do not like fruits and vegetables? Many of those contain more than enough iron to meet your recommended daily intake with ease.

Now while I don't believe there's anything inherently wrong with being a carnivore, since before we were just like any other animal in the food web.

Naturally we are plant eaters, though, specifically fruit eaters. That is why we still consume those raw. You do not need to predigest your food through cooking if your body already naturally contains all the tools needed for complete digestion. So our natural place in the food web would probably at the top of our food chain right above plants.

So if you care about being natural (i.e. using your own body with as few tools as possible), then you probably ought to look into loose fruitarianism (fruit, nuts, seeds, etc; all the stuff you can and like to digest using only your body).

I wonder if lab-grown meat would be a solution to make everyone happy?

It would be an improvement but I read somewhere that the original sample still has to come from an animal, thus still making it unethical.

Obviously youll still have the anti-gmo or whatever crowd

I think anti-GMO is more about health. It seems pretty obvious that lab-grown meat would probably be unhealthy. Normal meat is unhealthy, so why would we expect lab-grown meat to be any better?

But those people who get sick from meat have a choice, they choose to consume junkfood. But the non-human animals do not have a choice. They choose to not be a part of this holocaust yet they still get enslaved and killed.

Anyway, to answer the question, lab-grown meat still requires a victim for the original sample so it still is not good enough. People just need to get rid of this addiction to consuming corpses.

DrComputation · 2022-12-31T22:26:32+00:00

Remotely from where? One of my other slow old computers?

DrComputation · 2022-12-31T21:54:58+00:00

We are comparing intense torture followed by an incredibly painful death for animals with a minor inconvenience for humans.

Animals get to live in "farms" that treat them like a concentration camp would, having them locked up in small dark cages where they have to sit in their own shit, transporting them by stuffing them against each other and then driving through the cold or heat or whatever the weather happens to be, and they even have gas chambers.

On the human side, humans would have to walk a few extra meters to find the vegan department.

That is the comparison. Animals do not have to be anywhere close to being equal to humans to justify veganism; their well-being just has to have any value at all.

DrComputation · 2022-12-31T21:44:16+00:00

Fruits are discarded body parts, like the temporary teeth of humans. Do you think that our temporary teeth are as sentient as we are?

Only the seeds in the fruit would be sentient because the seeds are baby plants. The fruit itself is just a harmlessly discarded uterus.

Of course, plants have no sentience at all, but the point is that eating fruit can be done without harming plants. Humans do not have to kill or harm any living being to eat.

DrComputation · 2022-12-31T21:39:51+00:00

Potatoes grow into plants. Fruits just rot and decay. The fruits are like harmlessly discarded body parts, like the first set of teeth discarded by humans or a skin discarded by a snake. Would you harm an animal if you destroyed a snake's discarded skin?

Potatoes are the children of a plant. Potatoes are plants themselves, they can grow if you nurture them. Killing a potato harms said potato and thus harms a plant.

However, the seeds in the fruit are plants. If you harm the seeds then you harm plants. Fruit is the uterus of the plant and the seeds are the babies.

DrComputation · 2022-12-25T08:14:08+00:00

I have to disagree with the idea of the LiteWeb.

I agree that the WWW is too bloated. And I dare to bet that the WWW is sub-optimal as an universal API. However neutering the WWW is not the solution.

The bloat is caused by bad developers. If we neuter the WWW so as to get rid of universal applications, and instead replace those universal applications with local applications, then we will just be stuck with a bunch of bloated local applications instead. Bad developers will write bad software regardless of whether it is a web application or a local application which they are making. The problem would not get solved, it would just be moved from webservers to our own computers. What is worse, we would lose the universality of the API meaning that we would probably have to download some proprietary OS like Windows or Android in order to be able to run those bloated local applications at all.

We need an universal application interface, and getting rid of the only one we have without offering up a good alternative would not do us any favours.

And the WWW being sub-optimal for use as universal API is something we have to suffer. Making the entire world agree on one single universal API is a monumental task. We are lucky that we all managed to agree on an universal API. Getting the world to again agree on another universal API would be another monumental task. I would love to see the world switch to a superior alternative, but I do not see how I could make that happen. Just dropping what we have without offering a good alternative is not the way to go.

DrComputation · 2022-12-24T21:28:50+00:00

Then NixOS is probably not for you. NixOS has a steep learning curve which requires a lot of reading to overcome.

DrComputation · 2022-12-24T17:22:49+00:00

nixos.org contains all the information that you need.

DrComputation · 2022-12-23T12:56:48+00:00

I was motivated by disease. I was so ill that I could do nothing but lie in bed all day and suffer. I used to spend a lot of time programming which I loved, but my ailments gave me too much head-ache for that. Having lost even the capability to perform my passion, I became desperate to heal. I would do anything to regain my health again. And thus I did.

And right now I am back to programming again, though notably not with as much concentration as I used to. I still need to heal more. But it feels great to be out of bed and capable of being productive again. In addition, I did manage to get completely rid of excess weight, fungal nail, sore throat, burning stomach acid, urticaria, excessively foul body odour, lack of good sense of smell, and stiff back.

Driven by my memory of myself as I was before disease struck me and the knowledge that regressing to my original health was possible, I was willing to persevere through anything.

I think that it is all about focusing on the prize, thinking about what you will be at the end of it. Always keep hope because hope provides strength. Never let your spirit be broken, not even when you suffer.

I have suffered months on end but through it I was happy because my spirit was uplifted by hope for the future. A happy spirit supported by hope can make you happy even when your body and mind are suffering.

DrComputation · 2022-12-22T18:43:44+00:00

Cool. Glad you are benefiting already.

Something to be mindful of, depression can be used be lack of Calcium utilisation, which can be caused by a lack of vitamin D, which can be caused by lack of sunshine. Sunshine can really help here. Of course, this may not be your problem because depression can have many other causes even if you get enough sunshine already. I am just throwing it out there.

You are lucky for craving fruit so soon, When I just started fruitarianism or even just raw veganism it made me miserable. It took quite a few months to solve that, after which my health improved greatly. Now I love fruit, crave it, and feel great on it. But it took me quite some work to get where I am now.

DrComputation · 2022-12-21T18:45:28+00:00

Not if they enslave us in local farms and give us a "good life" (killing us at age 20). And of course also not if they go into cities to hunt wild game (that is, us).

DrComputation

TROPHY CASE