Jonathan Ball > wrote in message ink.net>...
> tg wrote:
>
> > wrote in message >. ..
> >
> >>On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:12:20 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Yet another confused person has offered the faulty
> >>>"logic of the larder" as a moral justification for
> >>>human use of animals. That now makes two. Woo and yay.
> >>>
> >>>Life per se - basic existence - is not a benefit to any
> >>>creature.
> >>
> >> Then you still need to show how something (animal or not)
> >>can benefit if it's not alive. Since you can't, we're left to
> >>understand that life is the benefit which makes all others
> >>possible.
> >
> >
> > This is a very silly little discussion which is all about definition
> > and tricky use of language. Make your point without that, if it
> > matters so much.
> >
> > "Something can/cannot benefit if it's not alive" assumes some
> > existence when it is dead.
> >
> > "Life is the benefit" begs the question.
> >
> > C'mon, you can do better.
>
> No, he can't. Seriously. This has been his shabby
> little attempt at a trick since he first began posting
> to usenet, four-and-a-half years ago.
>
> As you point out, it involves question-begging and
> other tricky use of language. It's odd that ****WIT
> would even attempt it, because he is an uneducated
> high-school dropout, and simply doesn't have the skill
> to engage in that kind of sophistry.
Ok, but I would apply a somewhat different challenge to what I've seen
of your position---what the hell is it? What if all the ****wits
didn't exist, would you have any purpose in life?
The argument about being omnivorous v. vegetarian or vegan or whatever
fine distinction you like to make seems to be all about farming rather
than some fundamental principle.
Putting aside the natural competition for energy (what I eat is stuff
you can't), it seems obvious that an herbivore causes less suffering
to other entities than a predatory carnivore. You may have some
fundamentalist concern about eating nuts as a form of abortion, but I
doubt that they (the nuts) experience fear when they are being cracked
open.
So there is some ethical position regarding eating meat which is
reasonable---you could choose to forage for plants and eggs and
scavenge kills rather than hunting. Would you still be a ****wit?
-tg