View Single Post
  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
Wilson Woods
 
Posts: n/a
Default If we breed more cattle - I can get a cheaper steak

JethroUK© wrote:

> "Wilson Woods" > wrote in message
> .net...
>
>>the semi-literate JethroUK© scrawled:
>>
>>
>>>"Wilson Woods" > wrote in message
thlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>JethroUK© wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Wilson Woods" > wrote in message
arthlink.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>JethroUK© wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>for whom or what might it be "better"/"more moral"
>>>>>>>>>>if animals come into existence?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It would be better for:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>1/ That particular animal
>>>>>>
>>>>>>NO. "That particular animal" didn't exist prior to
>>>>>>existing, so coming into existence CANNOT "benefit" it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>it's not 'comming into existance' (as per a twinkle in it's mothers
>>>
>>>eye - as
>>>
>>>
>>>>>per the article you are trying to regurgite, but totally MIS-read) - it
>>>>>already exists!
>>>>
>>>>No, DUMMY. The question is, for whom or what is it
>>>>better for an animal to come into existence? Can't you
>>>>read?
>>>>
>>>>The answer CANNOT be for the animal itself. In order
>>>>for something to be "better" for some entity, the
>>>>entity must ALREADY exist. "Coming into existence",
>>>>THEREFORE, cannot be "better" for an animal.
>>>
>>>
>>>yes it can!

>>
>>No, it can't! I've just explained why it can't be!
>>You don't get it!
>>
>>
>>>- 'better' is a relative term - thus only needs a perspective -
>>>from the point of view of the [live] animal itsself (it's perspective) -

>
> it
>
>>>is better to be alive than not

>>
>>No. That's impossible. You cannot compare existence
>>to non-existence:

>
>
> yes you can, but only if you exist - the existance define the perspective -
> if you can consider yourself better off dead than alive - you can equally
> consider yourself better off alive than dead


No. That's the whole issue. When you exist, you can
think that your existence is so awful, you don't want
to continue it. You won't *really* be "better off"
dead than alive, because you won't BE.

However, prior to existence you have no perspective at
all; there is no 'you'. Thus, it is plainly absurd to
say that 'you' are "better off" - have an improved
well-being - for coming into existence, as prior to
existing, 'you' didn't HAVE any well-being to improve.

No animal, human or non-human, is "better off" merely
for coming into existence. It's absurd and impossible.


I'm growing tired of trifling with you. You're
incompetent to discuss philosophy, and I don't like
wasting time with semi-literate cretins. Learn to
spell, learn to capitalize, learn proper punctuation,
and learn *something* about metaphysics. Right now,
you're just a buffoon.