Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Animal Cruelty

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 10:08pm

EmperorPalpatine

EmperorPalpatine

4,977 posts

Anyway, it is wrong to hurt animals in any case at all

Are you including all animals? Sponges, insects? Why not plants as well?

except for self defense.

At what juncture is self defense justified? ex: hunting wolves before they ambush you, shooting a lion running in your general direction at a reasonable distance.

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 10:34pm

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

8,277 posts

You evidently don't. Hitting a person or an animal is a type of positive reinforcement. It is a positive punishment.

Spanking..a kind of Punishment. Which is a strong form of Negative Reinforcement

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 10:49pm

tegan190

tegan190

614 posts

An article on the internet doesn't prove someones opinion is wrong ^

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 11:01pm

Devoidless

Devoidless

3,553 posts

Except it wasn't put forth as an opinion. It was put forth as a fact disputing what what previously mentioned. Nothing about that post even implied it was an opinion.

Besides, no one can disprove an opinion since it is just that. An opinion. Opinion implies that the thought/idea has little or no factual backing. Thus can not be disproved (within reasonable constraints).

Please familiarize yourself with such basic principles before cluttering up the forum with wrong/useless posts.

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 11:08pm

SSTG

SSTG

10,882 posts

Knight

Devoidless, did you just take a bite off Tegan190's head?
What about gingerbread cruelty? xD

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 11:49pm

Xzeno

Xzeno

2,082 posts

Except it wasn't put forth as an opinion. It was put forth as a fact disputing what what previously mentioned. Nothing about that post even implied it was an opinion.

It's funny how pang's link supports my statement, not his. It's not even something that's worth discussing. It's just a minor technical correction. People don't know what negative reinforcement means. That's fine.

And Devoidless, opinions can be both wrong and disproved. For instance, someone could hold that macroevolution is false. That is their opinion. It is also wrong. People can and do hold opinions about factual or empirical matters, and in those cases, sometimes their opinions are wrong.

Not all opinions are created equally. Some are better than others. They have varying degrees of value based on the arguments and facts supporting them.

On topic: yes, it is wrong to harm sponges. It is wrong to harm insects. It is wrong to harm plants and fungi as well.

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 11:55pm

EmperorPalpatine

EmperorPalpatine

4,977 posts

On topic: yes, it is wrong to harm sponges. It is wrong to harm insects. It is wrong to harm plants and fungi as well.

At least you're consistant, so I can respect that. But what could we eat without harming anything? How strong of measures should we take to not harm other things (ex: sweeping in front of where you step)? Does mowing the lawn count as plant abuse?

 

Posted Jan 21, '13 at 11:58pm

Devoidless

Devoidless

3,553 posts

And Devoidless, opinions can be both wrong and disproved.

The example you gave was not of a real opinion. That falls under the category of people labeling what they say as 'opinions' because they do not feel like/lack the necessary brainpower to back up what they say.
Ex)
- "Your sister's a ****, but that's just my opinion."
- "It's just my opinion but all black people are lazy."
- "In my opinion, being a queer just ain't right."
The idea of an opinion is throw around and used in the wrong context far too much these days. Largely to just avoid debates or the like.
/off topic

Feel free to continue the discussion please.

 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 12:11am

phsycomonkey

phsycomonkey

657 posts

@ Devoidless and Xzeno
Opinions can only be wrong if they can be proven so. So unless it can be proven. An opinion such as: "Red is stupid" Is entirely based upon the person's own thoughts and/or preference.
Opinions that can be proven are ones such as: "Red is not a gay color." Because it can be seen or proven that gay and red do not have anything to do with each other.
An opinion such as "Red doesn't compliment green well." Is one that can be argued both ways. More or less this could just be wording. But A preference may be that red and green are not appealing together. The proving part is that red and green ARE in fact compliments on the color wheel.

In my opinion, opinions are not always right or wrong. But not always not right or wrong.

 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 12:36am

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

8,277 posts

It's funny how pang's link supports my statement, not his. It's not even something that's worth discussing. It's just a minor technical correction. People don't know what negative reinforcement means. That's fine.

Just read into it a crap-ton more...I had my terminology mixed up. I could blame my textbooks for having them mixed up as well..but then again I should have backed it up by reading into it more. Thank you

yes, it is wrong to harm sponges. It is wrong to harm insects. It is wrong to harm plants and fungi as well.

...So, I shouldn't walk in grass anymore?

 
Reply to Animal Cruelty

You must be logged in to post a reply!