Dietary ethics
On Aug 2, 5:02*pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> On 8/2/2012 7:51 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 2, 4:50 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >> On 8/2/2012 7:43 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On Aug 2, 4:39 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >>>> On 8/2/2012 6:59 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Aug 2, 3:39 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> No. *The things he says that are lies don't contradict his statements of
> >>>>>>>>>> belief.
>
> >>>>>>>>> Well, I must have misunderstood you
>
> >>>>>>>> They don't contradict his statements of belief because the apparent
> >>>>>>>> contradictions are lies. *His statements of belief are "true" in the
> >>>>>>>> sense that they accurately state his beliefs. *When he says that the
> >>>>>>>> "unborn animals" will experience some loss if their conception and birth
> >>>>>>>> are prevented, he is expressing a belief that is in accord with all of
> >>>>>>>> his other unsolicited statements of belief. *When he says he couldn't
> >>>>>>>> believe "they" would experience a loss because he considers them to be
> >>>>>>>> "nothing", that is a lie, and so it cannot contradict his statement of
> >>>>>>>> belief.
>
> >>>>>>> You appear to be confused about what "contradict" means.
>
> >>>>>> No.
>
> >>>>> I'm afraid
>
> >>>> Because you've not been taking your anti-psychotic meds.
>
> >> You should get back on them, or else very unpleasant wobbliness will result.
>
> > I am taking them as prescribed.
>
> Clearly you aren't. *Increased wobbliness is in stark evidence.
>
There are many things you think you know which you don't.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>>>>> * * *Only if he truly believed that the unconceived farm animals are
> >>>>>>>> "nothing" could it be contradictory, but he doesn't believe that, as I
> >>>>>>>> have proved.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ****wit *still* believes that the "getting to experience life" is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> important - *morally* important - to the animals themselves, even before
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> they are conceived and born and exist as rational people think of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> existence. *The *only* way he can believe that is if he believes they
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "pre-exist in some sense." *He does believe that. *He is an idiot.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, you certainly seem to be convinced.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm right.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> So you would appear to believe.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> You know I'm right. *You just like being an asshole.
>
> >>>>>>>>> You seem to react in a very hostile way when someone isn't persuaded
> >>>>>>>>> by your argument.
>
> >>>>>>>> You just like being an asshole - a bloated-ego asshole.
>
> >>>>>>> You seem to be rather intolerant of differences of opinion.
>
> >>>>>> No.
>
> >>>>> That's very funny.
>
> >>>> No.
>
> >>> Well, I laughed.
>
> >> Psychosis.
>
> > That was quite funny as well.
>
> That's lovely.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't hate you
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ha ha ha ha ha ha! *Yes, you do, Woopert. *It's irrational, but that's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent for you.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think I hate you?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Irrationality.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> No,
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Yes.
>
> >>>>>>> What led you to the conclusion that I hate you
>
> >>>>>> What you write here, and your obsession with me.
>
> >>>>> Where do you see the evidence of hatred?
>
> >>>> In your posts.
>
> >>> Can you be more specific?
>
> >> <yawn>
>
> > Your belief that I hate you is irrational.
>
> It isn't.
Then why are you unable to supply a rational foundation for it?
|