View Single Post
  #105 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,alt.food.vegan,alt.food.vegan.science
Rupert Rupert is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,380
Default "vegan" arrogance and egotism

On Apr 3, 10:11*pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> On 4/3/2012 11:46 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> > On Apr 3, 6:22 pm, George > *wrote:
> >> On 4/2/2012 11:24 PM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>> On Apr 2, 10:45 pm, George > * *wrote:
> >>>> On 3/31/2012 1:39 AM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>>>> On Mar 25, 7:15 am, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>> On 3/24/2012 8:08 PM, Glen wrote:

>
> >>>>>>> On 24/03/2012 18:18, George Plimpton wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 3/24/2012 6:24 AM, Rupert wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 11:19 pm, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2012 1:42 PM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 8:31 pm, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2012 10:44 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2012 10:20 AM, Derek wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:56:09 -0700, George >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2012 8:46 AM, Rupert wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 4:00 pm, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2012 12:03 AM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 7:52 am, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/2012 11:31 PM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 7:25 am, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/2012 11:04 PM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 6:55 am, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/2012 10:27 PM, Rupert wrote:

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 2:33 am, George > * * *wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A typical "vegan" tries to argue "Why vegans are simply
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people."http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=226259

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All "vegans" believe that. Woopert is lying when he
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> says he
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you suppose would motivate me to lie about it?

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because you know that bragging that your character is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of others, particularly on such an inflammatory and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contentious topic as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not putting animal parts in your mouth, is going to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generate
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well-founded criticism, and you don't want to have to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defend
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourself
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> against the charge of placing yourself on a moral
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pedestal,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so you just
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lie. But you *do* think you're "simply better" than
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those who
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animal products.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You say that I am aware that the critcism would be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "well-founded".

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, I say it is well-founded, and it would be, because
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bragging
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being better, even if an objective case can be made that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is still disparaged.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It doesn't matter if you know it would be well-founded or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You *do*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know that the criticism would ensue, so to avoid it you
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lie and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not to believe what you obviously *do* believe.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If I know that the criticism would be well-founded,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this lead
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me to critically re-examine the belief?

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The criticism would be for the bragging, you stupid ****wit.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You know this.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The simple fact is, you do believe you're "better" than meat
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eaters
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on what you don't put in your mouth.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't really think, in general, it is meaningful to say
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that one
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person is "better" than another. I'm with the followers of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Rational Emotive Behavioural Therapy on this one. You
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaningfully compare two different people.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's bullshit. If I focus on one wrong behavior at a time
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - say,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> robbing liquor stores - and you commit the crime and I don't,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then I am
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better than you in that one dimension - not in doubt.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, your behaviour is morally better in that dimension,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes, and I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never denied that. I've always agreed that I believe that,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things equal, making some effort to reduce the amount of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> required to produce your food is morally better than not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing so.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is *all* you have left is a shaky, ill-founded
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> belief that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're "making an effort" merely by not putting animal parts
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mouth. All the piercing criticisms elaborated in the "vegan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shuffle"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument continue to hold. You aren't "minimizing" and you
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "doing the best you can" in regard to reducing suffering
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merely by not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> putting animal parts in your mouth. You just can't conclude
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing anything meaningful by *not* consuming animal parts,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relative to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone who does. Your beliefs about what the consumption of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts mean with regard to the *amount* of suffering one
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> causes are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> false.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What reasons do you have for thinking they are false?

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We've been through that countless times, you time-wasting
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shitbag. The
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> belief that one is making a meaningful reduction in animal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merely by *not* putting animal parts in one's mouth has been
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstrated to be illogical and false.

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, to paraphrase, "The belief that one is making a meaningful
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduction in [pollution] merely by *not* putting [garbage] in one's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [garbage bin] has been demonstrated to be illogical and false."

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I never claimed that recycling necessarily reduces pollution.