On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 18:51:52 -0700, Goo wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:40:36 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:32:27 -0700, Dutch > wrote:
>>
>>>dh@. wrote:
>>>
>>>> The fact that people who don't feel they have what could be considered a
>>>> truly "good" life don't all kill themselves tells us that life still has
>>>> positive value to them
>>>
>>>Those people already exist,
>>
>> So do animals in similar positions.
>
>No.

LOL!!! The idea that there are no animals in similar positions is so stupid
it's hilarious Goo.

>>>life only has value to a being once they
>>>exist. You need to read Salt's essay again, not that you will understand it.
>>
>> I understand that commercially raised pigs are no longer filthily housed and
>>fed, and also that Salt didn't have any idea whether life is of positive value
>>to most modern commercially raised pigs or not. I'd also say it's safe to
>>believe that he wouldn't feel any livestock animals' lives were worth living the
>>same as you and the Goober and all other misnomer addicts, meaning that none of
>>you could make a realistic distinction between which lives seem to be negative
>>and which seem to be positive.
>
>You *should* understand, but fail to understand, that "getting to
>experience life" is not a benefit.

It often appears that it is a benefit Goob so if you want people to think
something prevents it from being one, YOU need to try to explain what you want
people to think prevents it. Try explaining what you want people to think
prevents you from benefitting from experiencing your own life, Goo. Go:


(correct prediction: the Goober not only can't explain what he thinks is
preventing him from benefitting, but he's ashamed to even attempt to explain)