Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Animal Cruelty

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 1:07am

pHacon

pHacon

1,941 posts

I'll just jump in here randomly to say this. Nobody has a right to their opinions per se. They have a right to their informed opinions. Your beliefs aren't yours; they're about the world. They should be representative of the closest model of reality you can manage to define.

But belief and opinion are a tad bit different. While belief can be mostly touted as objective fact if you don't suck at thinking, opinion is strictly subjective.

In regard to this, it's all about terminal and instrumental values. Say I want to eat some pie. There are no specialist bakeries nearby and I don't have the patience to bake one myself right now, so I must deign to visit the supermarket to buy one of theirs. In a simplified decision map, I'll just say this as:

Step 1: Get to store.
Step 2: Buy pie.
Step 3: Eat pie.
Bob's your uncle.

But again, this is incredibly simplistic. For example, how did I get to the store? Did I take my car, did I take my bike, did I inflate the tires on my old bicycle and pedal that over? To any of those, I'll need to accomplish still more steps, the first of which is getting off my lazy bum. But say I took my car. What if, instead of opening the car door like a normal person, I took the thing off with a jackhammer? Well, the utility of that bloody well negative! Negative enough to make the trip to the store for my pie worthwhile? I may **** well want a pie, but I'm going to say probably not. Almost surely not.

Well, how about eating? The steps in that? Getting food and eating it, with the getting portion detailing the methods in which it's procured, prepared, and delivered, because I'm lazy and don't feel like enumerating more steps. Anyway... Yeah. Method of procurement. You're obviously going to hurt some animals, no matter what you do. Even if you have a little garden in your yard, whatever would have eaten those tomatoes is being screwed over because you're eating them instead. The question is whether you value your satisfaction above theirs. The answer is likely going to be an unequivocal yes, the exception of which would be PETA-sponsored animal terrorists, or something.

But that doesn't mean that it's not wrong to deny others existence and sustenance so that you can fulfill both of those yourself. It's bad to hurt things. Always bad. It's really a simple concept. It's one you could be told about by a five-year-old. All that matters is whether you value whatever your terminal value is more than the sum of the instrumental ones. Do I want to live? Well, yes. I want to live more than I want the things feeding me to live, and if you're reading this, you probably do, too. I do wish they wouldn't have to die, though. But meh.

I only blabbed about food because that's the only gray area within the sphere of discourse I can imagine at the moment. Everyone knows that if you abuse a creature for no reason other than your own sadistic whims, you're so ****ed in the head your frontal lobe must resemble a knob-end, and you probably shouldn't play any Pokémon games. That and how draft animals are only being abused if they're explicitly being abused.

 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 2:15pm

MattEmAngel

MattEmAngel

6,365 posts

Well, since this is an animal cruelty thread, I'll give my informed opinion, which may be taken as factual or not (before we get into that again), and say that my definition of animal cruelty is inflicting pain on an animal (not a plant, because this is ANIMAL cruelty) with no cause but to prove superiority, release anger or gain entertainment.

For example:

Superiority: Teasing a dog with a treat, then giving it to him is not cruel. Teasing a starving dog with a treat, then ignoring him is.
Anger: Smacking a dog with a newspaper to train him is not cruel. Smacking a dog with a baseball bat to let off some steam is.
Entertainment: Putting a silly hat on your dog and laughing is not cruel. Setting your dog on fire and laughing is.

This is my opinion. It is based on owning a dog for 10 years and seeing/reading about other dogs mistreated.

What is YOUR definition of animal cruelty?

 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 2:35pm

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

9,716 posts

Superiority: Teasing a dog with a treat, then giving it to him is not cruel. Teasing a starving dog with a treat, then ignoring him is.


There are other, non-abusive ways to assert superiority. Taking the dog for a walk..the dog walks ahead of you..then you tug the dog back with the leash so that he is either next to you or slightly behind you. (may have to do this a few times blah blah) That is asserting to the dog that you are superior to it and that you are the one leading this walk and not it (this is also asserting dominance)
 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 2:45pm

MattEmAngel

MattEmAngel

6,365 posts

Taking the dog for a walk..the dog walks ahead of you..then you tug the dog back with the leash so that he is either next to you or slightly behind you.


I would put that somewhere between the "cruel" category and the "not cruel" catagory, aka the "just being a jerk" category.
 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 4:06pm

sourwhatup2

sourwhatup2

3,795 posts

I don't think animals will adhere to your command just after one round of scolding or time out. And really, time out?


It worked with my dogs.. If they did anything bad I would immediately put them in their kennel.

One dog had a whole backyard, which by the way was pretty big, and when we locked him up in a cage he would start whining and barking and this is because he has sort of a sense of ''freedom''. The other dog had the freedom to go anywhere and even be out without a leash, so when put into a cage she wasn't very happy and she would whine and bark as well and we'd just ignore her. Eventually we would let them out after a while and they usually never did ''that thing'' they did earlier. We also did this with ''potty'' training as well and it worked like a charm. But again, every dog is different so you can't be sure and sometimes different measures of discipline have to be taken into account.

I have ''spanked'' my dogs a few times, but it wasn't anything exaggerated, they would just sit and stay where they were, I would then pull them into the cage and close it. Sometimes my bigger dog would know, and he would just walk tot he cage himself and sit there until I locked it and then he would lie down.

I don't think spanking is a great method but it can work, just as long as it's your last resort of discipline it should be fine.

From personal experiences I can truthfully say that it is a major amount of pain!


Spanking never hurt me. The belt did though lol. Though I wasn't punished very often, and usually if I was I just got grounded.

Not that that means we shouldn't do it. Being necessary doesn't make it right, though.


This. That about covers most of the hunting..

OT:

Animal cruelty in itself is wrong.

Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse or animal neglect, is the infliction of suffering or harm upon non-human animals, for purposes other than self-defense.

So even hunting is a form of cruelty, but it's a necessity. To eat you need to hunt and to hunt you must commit the act of animal cruelty. Then again it could be said that the animal dies instantly so it isn't abuse or cruelty, but I think otherwise.

That definition which I got from wiki, I also consider my definition, because, to be honest, it is a form of animal cruelty if it's not self-defense. What it comes down to is what you consider self-defense to be.

Superiority: Teasing a dog with a treat, then giving it to him is not cruel. Teasing a starving dog with a treat, then ignoring him is.
Anger: Smacking a dog with a newspaper to train him is not cruel. Smacking a dog with a baseball bat to let off some steam is.
Entertainment: Putting a silly hat on your dog and laughing is not cruel. Setting your dog on fire and laughing is.


I agree with this as well. Me having 2 dogs over a span of 8-10 years I can say that it's pretty much that.

I would put that somewhere between the "cruel" category and the "not cruel" catagory, aka the "just being a jerk" category.


To be honest, not really. This is just stating that you are the dominant one and not the dog. It should be like this. You lead.. not the dog.
 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 4:17pm

MattEmAngel

MattEmAngel

6,365 posts

To be honest, not really. This is just stating that you are the dominant one and not the dog. It should be like this. You lead.. not the dog.


It's kind of hard to walk a dog standing in front. Plus, if you're clever like my dog, you back up and slip the collar off your neck. I decided to just let the dog walk in front, rather than buy a steel choke chain. All you have to do is jerk the leash a few times to tell her that you're going left instead of right. It works fine.
 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 5:18pm

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,260 posts

Knight

I would put that somewhere between the "cruel" category and the "not cruel" catagory, aka the "just being a jerk" category.

It could be considered part of training, especially in the city. Like, "stay close to me".

Would you say that it can be considered animal cruelty to breed unnatural races that might end up having several problems and suffer from it, just for breeding purpose?
 

Posted Jan 22, '13 at 6:49pm

MattEmAngel

MattEmAngel

6,365 posts

Would you say that it can be considered animal cruelty to breed unnatural races that might end up having several problems and suffer from it, just for breeding purpose?


Define "unnatural." Many dog breeds came from breeding different classes of dog. Some were created by accident. One breed of black-furred retriever occasionally had a litter with a golden-furred puppy. Someone noticed and bred a pair of the golden puppies. The Golden Retriever breed came into existance. Not really relevant, but still interesting.
 

Posted Jan 23, '13 at 12:33am

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

9,716 posts

It's kind of hard to walk a dog standing in front.


Not really..have them a couple inches behind you

Also..another point with the dog walking..having the dog on a leash in general is a form of superiority. You are establishing yourself as the "master" and that you are the one allowing this walk to happen as well as establishing limitations to where the dog may wander
 

Posted Jan 23, '13 at 12:45am

EmperorPalpatine

EmperorPalpatine

9,438 posts

as well as establishing limitations to where the dog may wander

You mean away from the tires?
 
Reply to Animal Cruelty

You must be logged in to post a reply!