The Ethics of Hurting Animals

[Pride]

Immagining yourself to be the object of hunting would answer your question. But you don't want to think about that, do you? It's not that you "can't", you DON'T WANT TO.

"An action is only unethical as long as it's to the detriment of the human race". Really? Says who? You, a human yourself? That's hardly an impartial opinion. If some animals were more intelligent, they could have assumed the same self-important position. The very fact that some humans boast about being in the center of the universe and being superior to other species (not just in terms of intelligence, but in terms of priority of who has to live and who has to die), this is by itself the proof that they still have to go a long way to become really "superior". A superior being has humility, not a haughty attitude towards the less developed fellow beings.

Hypothetically speaking, if an alien civilization more advanced than humanity started treating humans in the same way you suggest to treat animals, you wouldn't like that at all, would you?

And before you say what I suspect you may say, please, don't derail the discussion by picking on words with observations about aliens most likely not existing. You understand perfectly what I mean anyway, this was just a hypothetical example positioning you as prey, not the hunter, just to make you think about what you would feel or say, if you were treated in the same way as you suggest to treat others.

If you think that reflecting about such things is below your dignity, since animals are inferior etc etc then, well, I just keep reading. Phoenix Wright will provide better arguments I think (in this thread I completely agree with him).

If I was the object of a hunt then I'm just shit out of luck aren't I? I'd curse my existence for being weak enough to allow this to happen and then die, cause there is nothing else I can do. This isn't a "haughty" attitude, this is a practical one. What gain is there for humanity in affording other life a luxury? The only reasonable answer is that it is to our benefit to do so. You talk about living up to some moral ideal, that a ""superior"" being should have ""humility"" but what worth is there in doing that? And why does your worldview get to be inconsistent about the value of a life?

me - everything's life is acceptable to take as long as it isnt to humanitys detriment

you - it's conditional, it's ok if its plants, its ok if its insects, its ok if its for eating SOMETIMES, but as soon as you can feel bad for it, now it's not ok?

How do you justify that?

just as i think kicking a dog is cruel, so too is killing one for sport.

yeah but

why

what bad does it do to anyone

what if i kick a dog thats coming at me foul, is that cruel

[Phoenix Wright]

obviously not, that's self defense. don't be dense; and stop trying to troll

[Dwalin2010]

If I was the object of a hunt then I'm just shit out of luck aren't I? I'd curse my existence for being weak enough to allow this to happen and then die, cause there is nothing else I can do. This isn't a "haughty" attitude, this is a practical one. What gain is there for humanity in affording other life a luxury? The only reasonable answer is that it is to our benefit to do so. You talk about living up to some moral ideal, that a ""superior"" being should have ""humility"" but what worth is there in doing that? And why does your worldview get to be inconsistent about the value of a life?

me - everything's life is acceptable to take as long as it isnt to humanitys detriment

you - it's conditional, it's ok if its plants, its ok if its insects, its ok if its for eating SOMETIMES, but as soon as you can feel bad for it, now it's not ok?

How do you justify that?

I am not saying it's ok, but I don't want to die of starvation, so I "sometimes" allow that to myself. But hopefully no more than necessary, and surely not for fun. I blame myself only up to a certain point for that, because I can't blame wolves or lions for hunting to fill their stomachs. It would be 1000 better if I were able not to eat any living being at all, not even plants, but not everybody can force themselves to commit a slow suicide by starvation, you can consider this a negative quality of mine, one of the manifestations of human imperfection. I am not saying I am "good", I just try to be the "lesser evil", in we put it that way.

Edited November 4, 2016 by Dwalin2010

[Pride]

missed your edit there compadre

just as i think kicking a dog is cruel, so too is killing one for sport.

eh, maybe. but there's half-a-dozen competing philosophies on how one ought to measure that. nothing in philosophy is black and white, pride. i think that's typically the major motivation for its study.

humans are infamously not responsible hunters, anyway. so even if i conceded that responsible hunting is okay (i don't), practically speaking that still happens to not align with reality. it's a false approximation of human behavior and therefore a flawed argument.

Of course it isn't black and white, I said as much when I mentioned there is plenty of debate on what falls into categories of right and wrong. But if you think that the nature of ethics is different than what I've described then elucidate me with your own view on the intended function of things being right and wrong at all.

When did I ever argue that all hunting is responsible hunting? I firmly believe irresponsible hunting should be stopped with the same intensity as any crime against humanity, but like a crime it must be proven to be damaging before there can be a conviction. What is your proof that the killing of animals without endangering their species is as harmful to humanity as hunting them to extinction?

obviously not, that's self defense. don't be dense; and stop trying to troll

???

im just trying to figure how you tick on this subject man, sorry if my questions come off as stupid but you didnt really give me much to work with at first blush

I am not saying it's ok, but I don't want to die of starvation, so I "sometimes" allow that to myself. But hopefully no more than necessary, and surely not for fun. I blame myself only up to a certain point for that, because I can't blame wolves or lions for hunting to fill their stomachs. It would be 1000 better if I were able not to eat any living being at all, not even plants, but not everybody can force themselves to commit a slow suicide by starvation, you can consider this a negative quality of mine, one of the manifestations of human imperfection. I am not saying I am "good", I just try to be the "lesser evil", in we put it that way.

Well then I got nothing else to say to you except I think that your moral standards are silly and im sorry you have to live thinking of yourself as imperfect for optimizing your survival

[Phoenix Wright]

missed your edit there compadre

Of course it isn't black and white, I said as much when I mentioned there is plenty of debate on what falls into categories of right and wrong. But if you think that the nature of ethics is different than what I've described then elucidate me with your own view on the intended function of things being right and wrong at all.

i said "eh, maybe." you and i noted it isn't black and white, but you missed the crux of the sentence: there are different measures of normative ethics. not only is morality subjective, but also the standards by which morality is derived and judged is subjective.

When did I ever argue that all hunting is responsible hunting? I firmly believe irresponsible hunting should be stopped with the same intensity as any crime against humanity, but like a crime it must be proven to be damaging before there can be a conviction. What is your proof that the killing of animals without endangering their species is as harmful to humanity as hunting them to extinction?

i never claimed it's as harmful. stealing candy isn't as bad as raping someone, but both are unethical.

what's wrong with hunting humans? semi-serious question.

???

im just trying to figure how you tick on this subject man, sorry if my questions come off as stupid but you didnt really give me much to work with at first blush

i gave you so little to work with that you thought for a second i'd rather a dog hurt a human than a human defend himself? i don't think you've been reading my posts if that happens to be the case lol.

[Pride]

i said "eh, maybe." you and i noted it isn't black and white, but you missed the crux of the sentence: there are different measures of normative ethics. not only is morality subjective, but also the standards by which morality is derived and judged is subjective.

i never claimed it's as harmful. stealing candy isn't as bad as raping someone, but both are unethical.

what's wrong with hunting humans? semi-serious question.

i gave you so little to work with that you thought for a second i'd rather a dog hurt a human than a human defend himself? i don't think you've been reading my posts if that happens to be the case lol.

of course its subjective, what im asking you to do is show me a view that would change my own

im an open minded man, and if you have anything to share that you feel is a more accurate perception of the truth than my own, I'd like to know it

Depending on the situation, hunting humans is not the wrong thing to do

In regard to humanity, if the individual's actions are to the detriment of the collective, the detrimental action must be stopped. We are very very careful about the details of what it means to be detrimental and how we stop other humans because it sets precedents for conditions in which the collective would be in the "right" to stop ourselves

Thats all the grey nebulous area that is actually complicated because there are meaningful implications for every individual in the collective depending on how things are handled

The killing or harming of non-humans meanwhile has no stakes for the individual or the collective of humanity, precisely because animals are not members of our society, the human collective

So I'm asking you, what harm does it do to kill for sport provided the killings are not endangering the species and thus ruining something that might be good for us?

i admit i glazed over a lot of your previous posts in this thread but i promise i am paying attention now

[Phoenix Wright]

Depending on the situation, hunting humans is not the wrong thing to do

it's likely we won't come to a consensus, then. even if consenting, i simply can't get behind letting folks kill each other for sport. that we toy with life for sport is a detriment to society, in my opinion.