|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Breaks my heart...... /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1530481549 Message started by raydawg on 07/01/18 at 14:45:49 |
|
Title: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/01/18 at 14:45:49 I do not understand this at all..... Well, that is what I tell myself, anyway. Yet I kill crab, and fish, and eat slaughtered animals. Is everything about degree, justification, or? Would I be justified in killing another human being if they were in the act of killing others? Kinda deep question, eh? :-? The article: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/07/01/american-hunters-images-her-black-giraffe-trophy-kill-spark-outrage.amp.html |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by oldNslow on 07/01/18 at 19:15:48 Quote:
Depends on who the "others" were, and why they were being killed, I suppose. In the absence of some absolute moral authority as the arbiter of right and wrong, anything can be justified. Quote:
Fundamental ethical question, in fact. I'm not sure what it's got to do with giraffes though. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/01/18 at 19:26:55 7846474B5945442A0 wrote:
Fundamental ethical question, in fact. I'm not sure what it's got to do with giraffes though.[/quote] Well I judge her based on my own feelings. Have I been indoctrinated by articles/movies, etc, from Bambi to the same talking points at the San Diego Zoo.... 50 plus years ago they said while I watched their animal presentations, another 10 acres of tropical rainforests habit was just removed for a parking lot ;) destroyed. Do I look at that awesome animal and say why? I know growing up in SoCal I fished a lot.... Those same fish, that I caught, the stock is practically gone. We do have a impact, that is a certainty. So, can I rightly cast stones if I live in a glass house myself? Edit: who is, and what determines, moral authority? Is it universal, cultural, societal, or what? |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by oldNslow on 07/01/18 at 20:01:20 If you are conflicted about the morality or ethics of trophy hunting vs. killing animals for food, I get that. It's a dilemma a lot of people struggle with I think. But your question was about killing humans. Quote:
Giraffes are not human beings. Neither are the animals that humans have used for food for millenia. And of course the non-human inhabitants of the planet kill and eat one another also. I guess I just don't see the connection between your question and the debate over whether it was or was not OK for the lady to shoot the giraffe. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/01/18 at 21:22:39 7D43424E5C40412F0 wrote:
At its core, hunting was for survival, food, yes? Not "sport", tho it did become that later, to many. The connection was survival, killing another human, before they kill me. Does that help? |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by oldNslow on 07/02/18 at 06:30:11 Quote:
Yes. Killing to defend one's own life is an absolute right, IMO. Killing to defend someone else's life may or may not be morally justified but the right to do that is not absolute. Killing animals for food(survival) is also an absolute right. Humans evolved to be omnivores. We eat the flesh of other animals , as well as he other foods that we are capable of eating to sustain life. Killing animals for sport or trophys is another issue entirely and is open to debate. Hence the social media sh*tstorm over this specific animal and similar ones in the recent past. I can tell you what I think, but unless you and I agree on where the moral authority for determining whether such an activity is right or wrong comes from, all that really amounts to is what I THINK. Regardless of whatever argument those on either side of the issue try to claim justify their point of view, there will never be an answer that satisfies everyone. Unless of course the fundamental question is answered first. Is there some absolute moral authority for what we do.? And if so, where, or from whom, or from what, does it come?. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/02/18 at 07:08:48 I enjoyed reading that |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MShipley on 07/02/18 at 07:17:52 Killing to defend one's own life is an absolute right, IMO. Killing to defend someone else's life may or may not be morally justified but the right to do that is not absolute. Killing animals for food(survival) is also an absolute right. Humans evolved to be omnivores. We eat the flesh of other animals , as well as he other foods that we are capable of eating to sustain life. Killing animals for sport or trophys is another issue entirely and is open to debate. Hence the social media sh*tstorm over this specific animal and similar ones in the recent past. I can tell you what I think, but unless you and I agree on where the moral authority for determining whether such an activity is right or wrong comes from, all that really amounts to is what I THINK. Regardless of whatever argument those on either side of the issue try to claim justify their point of view, there will never be an answer that satisfies everyone. Unless of course the fundamental question is answered first. Is there some absolute moral authority for what we do.? And if so, where, or from whom, or from what, does it come?. [/quote] It is interesting that no matter which side we are on we place an Intrinsic value on humans above all the other life on earth. We claim to have inalienable rights. We feel we should be treated Justly just because we are humans. So what is it that gives us this Intrinsic vale? If we are just an accident which rose from chance, time, matter. Why do we have any more value than ants? |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by Eegore on 07/02/18 at 08:14:48 "Would I be justified in killing another human being if they were in the act of killing others?" Maybe. If they are committing a crime sure, if they are a US soldier acting on orders to destroy an enemy then I'd say no. For instance if a cop kills a man trying to murder a lady the cop is justified, however killing the cop because he's in the act of killing another isn't. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 08:55:37 57484E4954536252625A48440F3D0 wrote:
Yeah, I did too.... So, can we investigate moral authority? From where does it derive? Lets back off a wee bit, first, while I try and exhibit the fallacy of man, believing he has the capacity to assign authority, to anything.... I suspect his motivation is tainted, toward his desired results. If you recall, I have shared this quote: We lie loudest when we lie to ourselves. (Eric Hoffer) I read that in my teens, I have often used it to self scrutiny, even when I didn't want to >:( So, if we default (our) actions, to a threshold based on moral authority, as just cause, for societal behavior, how is that universally acceptable when folks claim there is NO societal (beliefs) absolutes..... Using a argument based with a absolute? How can we say we believe in free speech, yet put restrictions, AND punishment, societal retaliations, upon that speak we don't like? Its not free then, is it? Just another feel good about self, justifications, to enforce MY wants, needs, beliefs.... Is that honesty, or deception based on manipulation, of others? Look at the Eric Hoffer quote again..... Within its understanding is freedom, yes? Can any of you grant me freedom of truth, if I myself, do not embrace it, first? Anybody wanna field these questions? |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by WebsterMark on 07/02/18 at 09:24:38 Truth is simultaneous absolute yet relative. What seems a contradictory statement is not when you consider absolute truth sometimes being clearly known and other times dependent upon your point of view. Generally, and this is very general, the society you find yourself in determines truth. However, for example, Palestinians routinely use suicide bombers or even children loaded with explosives against their enemy, the Jews, and celebrate that. Using their moral compass, that’s acceptable. However, in the greater societal family, that is not. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 09:31:52 society you find yourself in determines truth. That is trouble awaiting implementation, is it not? Is honesty and truth linked? |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by WebsterMark on 07/02/18 at 09:42:41 I would say yes. if I pass along inaccurate information to you while 100% believing that it was true, does that make me dishonest? I don't think so. The definition of a lie, at least the way that I have always viewed it is, passing along inaccurate information purposely based upon a selfish motivation. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by WebsterMark on 07/02/18 at 09:44:22 in my view on the giraffe for example is as long as it's not an endangered species or there is some compelling reason otherwise, I don't have a problem with it. But then I've hunted things before, it doesn't bother me or freak me out like others. I'm not gonna pull a jimmy Kimmel and start crying. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 10:13:19 447671606776615E726178130 wrote:
I agree IF you believe it’s true, but only after your belief was held up freely to investigation, and scrutiny, after any objection by another who believers otherwise.... Because we don’t allow such, with PC a good example, truth is assigned out of ignorance. When in fact it should be discussed, debated, openly, solely on merit, not projections, assumptions, etc, but discussed in factual realities..... As much as possible. Demagoguery is a tool used my the intellectually lazy and for devious reason. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MShipley on 07/02/18 at 10:24:03 " SOCIETY THAT YOU LIVE IN DETERMINES TRUTH" Some societies believe you should Love your neighbor while others believe you should eat them. Which is TRUTH. It is not all that difficult when it comes to Moral Absolutes or Truth it is either, Society, the Individual, or some Transcendent entity that defines these things for all mankind. lets look at all three. Society, the problem here is we all are aware that some societies are evil. If we say they have the right to define truth and Moral Authority then why did we stop the Nazi's, Why did we convict add put them to death. They were doing what they consider to be their Moral responsibility. The individual, same problem. Why do we think Dolmer was crazy? As Richard Dawkins says "he was just dancing to his DNA" But see we ALL KNOW that what the Nazis did was wrong. We ALL KNOW that Dolmer did evil. Why do we know that? Where did that information come from? It is interesting that every anti-thiestic philosopher from Dawkins to Hawkins says that there is NOWAY through naturalistic means to come up with a Moral Code. So why do we have one?...... the obvious is right in front of our nose. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by oldNslow on 07/02/18 at 11:20:22 Quote:
"If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." Voltaire Animals act from instinct, and thus are blameless. Men have free will and thus are accountable. The moral compass that guides men's actions cannot simply come from within. Unless of course we are merely wolves with the capacity to rationalise our acts. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MShipley on 07/02/18 at 11:49:37 Has anyone provided a proof of God's nonexistence? Not even close! Has quantum cosmology explained the emergence of the universe or why it is here? Not even close! Have the sciences explained why our universe seems to be fine-tuned to allow for the existence of life? Not even close! Are physicists and biologist willing to believe in anything so long as it is not religious thought? Close enough! Has rationalism in moral thought provided us with an understanding of what is good, what is right, and what is Moral? Not Close enough! Has secularism in the terrible 20th century been a force for good? Not even close to being close! Is there a narrow and oppressive orthodoxy of thought and opinion within the sciences? Close enough! Does anything in the sciences or in their philosophy justify the claim that religious belief is irrational? Not even in the ballpark! Is scientific atheism a frivolous exercise in intellectual contempt? Dead on! David Berlinski |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 11:53:15 "If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." Voltaire I love the irony of his observation ;D I find this statement worth investigating, further..... The moral compass that guides men's actions cannot simply come from within. Is our conscious real, perceived, or contrived? Look at #4. con·scious·ness [ kon-sh uhs-nis] NOUN 1. the state of being conscious; awareness of one's own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc. 2. the thoughts and feelings, collectively, of an individual or of an aggregate of people: the moral consciousness of a nation. 3. full activity of the mind and senses, as in waking life: to regain consciousness after fainting. 4. awareness of something for what it is; internal knowledge: consciousness of wrongdoing. 5. concern, interest, or acute awareness: class consciousness. Remember my earlier reference about lying to self. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MShipley on 07/02/18 at 12:00:56 If we present man with a concept of man that is not true, we may well corrupt him. when we present him as an automaton of reflexes, as a mind machine, as a bundle of instincts, as a pawn of drive and reactions, as a mere product of heredity and environment, we feed the nihilism to which modern man is, in any case, prone. I became acquainted with the last stage of corruption in my second concentration camp, Auschwitz. The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment-or,as the Nazis like to say, 'of blood and soil'. I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientist and philosophers. Viktor Frankl |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 12:01:11 Is scientific atheism a frivolous exercise in intellectual contempt? Dead on! A little vague there buddy. Do I believe a force exists merely to prove it wrong out of their desires it be so, absolutely... However, I think to challenge ones belief is the apex of honesty. If it is true, it's sustainable, without propping up, then I have found what I, or any other, can deny. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 12:07:39 5C427978617D7468110 wrote:
Man, again, using others to promote a understanding is still interpretation, for yes, we can gather historical data, assign it, deduce it, yet we never can fully interpret the will of another. I refer to the book of Job. If its the results that define, then we could also say mother nature, or who created nature, is nihilistic too, for look at the heartache and misery it has brought. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MShipley on 07/02/18 at 12:10:58 21322A37322434530 wrote:
Not my quote, take it for what it is. I think that Berlinski is point out that Scientific Atheism, though it is supposed to be open to truth wherever it takes it, only is open to it's own truth. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MShipley on 07/02/18 at 12:30:02 Man, again, using others to promote a understanding is still interpretation, for yes, we can gather historical data, assign it, deduce it, yet we never can fully interpret the will of another. I refer to the book of Job. If its the results that define, then we could also say mother nature, or who created nature, is nihilistic too, for look at the heartache and misery it has brought. [/quote] No offense but I think you missed Viktors point: Worldviews have consequences. The way we define Absolute truth and Morality has consequences. The way we define "What it is to be human" has consequences. Those consequences are usually the result of what is taught by current philosophers and scientist in the arena of acadameia. |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by raydawg on 07/02/18 at 13:20:02 425C67667F636A760F0 wrote:
No offense but I think you missed Viktors point: Worldviews have consequences. The way we define Absolute truth and Morality has consequences. The way we define "What it is to be human" has consequences. Those consequences are usually the result of what is taught by current philosophers and scientist in the arena of acadameia. [/quote] Yes, I agree with that observation..... Capitalism, capitalizes off such understandings, NIKE is just a shoe ;) I think we still need to go within ourselves, to find the truth..... That is why I keyed in on OldandSlow9(s) observation..... As believers, you and I find that inside ourselves via the Spirit, yes? |
|
Title: Re: Breaks my heart...... Post by MnSpring on 07/02/18 at 19:11:11 56455D40455343240 wrote:
Yes, hunting was for survival. Yet I believe their was a middle part left out. My great grandfather was probably the last that hunted for, survival. My Father, and I, hunted for 'Sport', Yet we were, Sportsman. We cleaned and consumed all we shot. Or we did not shoot it. We did not 'need' to have that food. In fact, if you added up the cost of guns, ammo, special cloths, etc. etc. etc. etc. and etc. It would would have been cheaper just buying the meat in a supermarket. (Which brings me to the statement from the Snowflake: "Just buy your meat from the supermarket, where no animal is harmed") Last 15 +/- years the States (Conservation Dept's, Fish and Game), started coming out with, 'Wanton Waste', laws. Which is, you can NOT, throw out your Fish/Ducks/Deer/etc. In response to purely, 'Sport' hunting. Where a person, (they call themselves a 'hunter', but they are not even close), buys the required License, (and etc), and SHOOTS, what EVER their license says. JUST to shoot. They are not even close to hunting. And therein, lies the mindset: 'well sure I'll give up my guns, just gonna have to go golfing', that the ultra-Liberals heard a Hand full of them, then tell everybody, it is Millions. Back to, 'sport' hunting. It has been around got a very long time, but only a very small amount of people. Take Jack O'Conner, (Well know-en Gun Nut), he hunted for 'Sport', also was a, 'shooter', and advanced the game of, 'shooting' to a degree only a shooter would know. (Just as someone knows who invented the 'ping', golf club). So today, is, 'hunting' needed ? NO, add it all up, supermarket is cheaper for the same Protein. YET, missing is the bonding. Father/Son, Mother/Daughter, Father/Daughter, Mother/Son, etc. Is GONE. Yea, the 'Cell Phone', replaces Human Interaction, with Parents and Siblings. Years ago saw a two panel cartoon. 1st. Father, pipe and Fedora hat, said to Son, "Let's go in, it's time I buy you a Gun and you start becoming a Man" 2nd. Father, outside a mac&dons, said to his son: "Let's go in, it's time I buy you a Big Mack, and make you a Man" (If you cannot see the difference between a big mack, and a gun. If you cannot see the differences of what was said. Then their is no hope) (and On, and ON, and ON, and ON, and ON) "... killing another human, before they kill me..." That is a very fundamental principal. One has to prepare themselves mentally, long before such a possibility. If you do, and realize their can be repructions after shooting someone, and accept it. Those are the people, you want around you. If you don't, and realize that that you just, can't. Then step aside, and let someone else do it. Do not take away their, Rights, to defend themselves. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |