this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
569 points (89.7% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

5681 readers
439 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One pretty consistent moral among societies is that needlessly causing harm is considered wrong.

besides your total lack of specificity about ethical systems or societies in which they exist, your use of "needlessly" is doing a lot of work there. on the one hand it sets up a no-true-scotsman where you can always claim no need is great enough, but it also gives anyone challenging this claim a loophole the size of a walmart to walk through: just claim it's necessary.

i don't think you really understand the claim you made. worse, if you do, that means you're intentionally using vague language and intellectually dishonest tactics to persuade. this is called sophistry.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Im kinda done arguing with dumbasses in good faith about whether or not killing an animal is less ethical than not killing one. I'm a meat eater, I find meat delicious, and I ALSO recognise that most of the world isnt in a privileged enough position to NOT eat meat in order to fulfill their dietary needs. None of this takes away from the fact that killing is less ethical than not killiing

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im kinda done arguing with dumbasses in good faith about whether or not killing an animal is less ethical than not killing one.

Abso-fucking-lutely based. Sometimes it's better to just call a dumbass, 'a dumbass' than engage with their bullshit sealioning.

[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

bullshit sealioning

stealing this

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im kinda done arguing with dumbasses in good faith about whether or not killing an animal is less ethical than not killing one.

calling your interlocutors names is a great way to indicate you're done arguing in good faith, but you just came out and said it. too bad you don't seem capable of defending the claim you're making.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah, it just means you idiots arent worth the headache

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

more name-calling, but no defense for your position.

[–] Serdan@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No one's obligated to debate you. 🙄

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

I don't want a debate