View Single Post
  #67 (permalink)   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:53:58 GMT, "misanthrope" > wrote:

>animal rights is an issue in which i have no interest, and i therefore feel
>i'm unqualified to pronounce upon it.


That doesn't mean human influence on animals should not be
discussed in a philosophy group. It may well be that none of you
care about it, but that doesn't mean it's not appropriate. And it is
certainly more appropriate than whining and crying because other
people are discussing it like your buddy Jones.

> wrote in message
.. .
>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:57:51 GMT, "misanthrope"

> wrote:
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> .. .

>>
>> >> Well, if instead of discussing the topic you simply complain about
>> >> it being brought up, that *could* have a negative influence as well,
>> >> imo.
>> >
>> >that would be valid point in the case of valid topics, but it's not valid
>> >for posts that contain nothing more than back-biting garbage.

>>
>> Some farm animals benefit from farming and some do not.
>> The so called "Animal Rights" people believe that no farm
>> animals benefit from farming, which is absurd. Maybe you
>> don't think human influence on animals has anything to
>> do with philosophy, but I feel sure some philosophers have
>> discussed it.
>> The "ARAs" in their desperation have decided to
>> promote the idea that life has never been a benefit to
>> anything. But life is the benefit which allows zygotes to
>> grow into animals, so every animal has benefitted from
>> life in at least that way. Life is the benefit which makes
>> all others possible.
>> Life itself and the individual lives of animals are completely
>> different things, and just because life itself is a benefit it
>> doesn't mean that all of the things experienced in the life
>> of a being are a benefit to the being.
>> When I post things to the philosophy group I'm hoping
>> that you guys would have covered all that sort of thing
>> and could add something interesting that we have not
>> already been over. Even though you apparently don't
>> want to discuss it, I still believe such topics are not
>> inappropriate for philosophers to discuss.
>>
>>

>http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...osophy&x=0&y=0
>>
>> Main Entry: phi·los·o·phy
>> Pronunciation: f&-'lä-s(&-)fE
>> Function: noun
>> Inflected Form(s): plural -phies
>> Etymology: Middle English philosophie, from Old French, from
>> Latin philosophia, from Greek, from philosophos philosopher
>> [...]
>> 2 a : pursuit of wisdom b : a search for a general understanding
>> of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational
>> means c : an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing
>> fundamental beliefs
>> 3 a : a system of philosophical concepts b : a theory underlying or
>> regarding a sphere of activity or thought <the philosophy of war>
>> <philosophy of science>
>> 4 a : the most general beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual
>> or group

>