Disclaimer: the "you" in this post does not refer to any specific individual. <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Speciesism. You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You kill a sentient being wrongly, you get charged with murder.
You kill a non-sentient being wrongly, you get asked to pay a fine.
Seems fine to me, unless you go ape on the non-sentient being killing, and then the penalty needs to get harsher.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> [begin rant] OK, seriously, no offence to you in general, but it's this viewpoint I hate also; the view that only humans are sentient, because other species do not "show any signs of it"...
In reality, the only reason humans say that they are the only sentient species, is it pleases their ego. That's what it boils down to. I mean if you check the definition of sentient, it's very unspecific when it comes to species, isn't it? I checked this before.. According to the definition most animal species are indeed sentient.. <a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience' target='_blank'>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience</a> I see no specific mention of humans there... do you?
[Bad example but whatever] If I was to kill your brother/mother/sister/whaetver claiming it was "ok" because I believed he/she wasn't sentient, you'd be royally ****ed off at me, yes? But as far as I could tell, he/she wasn't sentient, because he/she "showed no signs of it" from my perspective.....but then again, it's just an easy excuse, isn't it? How can humans hoenstly say what is and isn't sentient, when they can't even prove THEY are truely sentient? Have they actually worked out what sentience is created by? I very very much doubt they have. [/end rant]
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 04:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 04:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Disclaimer: the "you" in this post does not refer to any specific individual. <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Speciesism. You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You kill a sentient being wrongly, you get charged with murder.
You kill a non-sentient being wrongly, you get asked to pay a fine.
Seems fine to me, unless you go ape on the non-sentient being killing, and then the penalty needs to get harsher.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> [begin rant] OK, seriously, no offence to you in general, but it's this viewpoint I hate also; the view that only humans are sentient, because other species do not "show any signs of it"...
In reality, the only reason humans say that they are the only sentient species, is it pleases their ego. That's what it boils down to. I mean if you check the definition of sentient, it's very unspecific when it comes to species, isn't it? I checked this before.. According to the definition most animal species are indeed sentient.. <a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience' target='_blank'>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience</a> I see no specific mention of humans there... do you?
[Bad example but whatever] If I was to kill your brother/mother/sister/whaetver claiming it was "ok" because I believed he/she wasn't sentient, you'd be royally ****ed off at me, yes? But as far as I could tell, he/she wasn't sentient, because he/she "showed no signs of it" from my perspective.....but then again, it's just an easy excuse, isn't it? How can humans hoenstly say what is and isn't sentient, when they can't even prove THEY are truely sentient? Have they actually worked out what sentience is created by? I very very much doubt they have. [/end rant] <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You're the bloke who thinks he's a wolf, eh? No wonder you're annoyed.
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 04:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 04:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Disclaimer: the "you" in this post does not refer to any specific individual. <!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Speciesism. You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You kill a sentient being wrongly, you get charged with murder.
You kill a non-sentient being wrongly, you get asked to pay a fine.
Seems fine to me, unless you go ape on the non-sentient being killing, and then the penalty needs to get harsher.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> [begin rant] OK, seriously, no offence to you in general, but it's this viewpoint I hate also; the view that only humans are sentient, because other species do not "show any signs of it"...
In reality, the only reason humans say that they are the only sentient species, is it pleases their ego. That's what it boils down to. I mean if you check the definition of sentient, it's very unspecific when it comes to species, isn't it? I checked this before.. According to the definition most animal species are indeed sentient.. <a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience' target='_blank'>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience</a> I see no specific mention of humans there... do you?
[Bad example but whatever] If I was to kill your brother/mother/sister/whaetver claiming it was "ok" because I believed he/she wasn't sentient, you'd be royally ****ed off at me, yes? But as far as I could tell, he/she wasn't sentient, because he/she "showed no signs of it" from my perspective.....but then again, it's just an easy excuse, isn't it? How can humans hoenstly say what is and isn't sentient, when they can't even prove THEY are truely sentient? Have they actually worked out what sentience is created by? I very very much doubt they have. [/end rant] <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Other animals are not sentient because they don't possess self awarness they operate on basic instincts and self perservation. So no offense to you in particular but most people that have an idea that animals are sentient have seen too many Disney movies.
Personally I would hate for animals gain self awarness, no telling what would happen if chimps suddenly realized they were mere puppets in a world of man
/me here distant Planet of the Apes theme music.
PS I think killing a human who is no longer sentient isn't murder either, people in comas and people who are brain dead do not qualify as sentient.
dr.d: I think you are confusing sentience with sapience. Two different things. Even so I still don't think humans are the only sapient species... (sp??) Try reading the definition again for "sentient", no offence, I think you may have misread it <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Zig...I am Captain Planet!Join Date: 2002-10-23Member: 1576Members
the last time i checked, dolphins were the only creatures so far that have been dubbed "self-aware". by that i mean, if you're a fish, a cat, or (sorry, Beast), a wolf, you won't know it's you in the mirror. scientifically proven =\
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 10:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 10:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> dr.d: I think you are confusing sentience with sapience. Two different things. Even so I still don't think humans are the only sapient species... (sp??) Try reading the definition again for "sentient", no offence, I think you may have misread it <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Sentience : Being self-aware. E.g not acting on instinct, knowing you exist.
Sapience : Being clever (pretty much).
It has been proven AFAIK that virtually no (if any) land animals are sentinet, e.g if you put a mirror infront of them they'll probably attack it because they think its someone else.
Not that i'm arguing with you, i believe in most of what you have said.
there's obviously a problem if you think humans are sapient.
However, I do believe other animals are concious of their senses. I've personally never been of another species, and probably never will be, but I feel it absurd we would be the only ones aware of our environment. It's not because we have developped opposable thumbs and can communicate in words that we are the only ones able to think for real. The problem is, they are unaware of the other's act. For example, you go buy a dog, so the dog is yours for a few green pieces of paper. Does the dog know you now "own him"? probably not, but he is going to grow affection and understand you're somehow linked to him (provided you're a good master) If you think about it this way, some animals are using us in some way without us knowing. I'm not saying they enslave us, but somehow are parasites, and we are just mere "puppets" for THEIR existence.
btw, anyone saying humans are the dominating species on the world is horribly wrong
Somethign to add to the debate: how can humans be sure what they are acting on isn't just a higher form of instinct? The line is very blurry, is it not? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 10:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 10:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Somethign to add to the debate: how can humans be sure what they are acting on isn't just a higher form of instinct? The line is very blurry, is it not? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Because i have the instinct to punch people all the time yet i dont <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Zig...I am Captain Planet!Join Date: 2002-10-23Member: 1576Members
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 02:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 02:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Somethign to add to the debate: how can humans be sure what they are acting on isn't just a higher form of instinct? The line is very blurry, is it not? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> it is, and you are correct.
but we've got something extra in the form of sentience.
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 09:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 09:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If I understand correctly, you said we could add out own list of things we hate about the world and such, so here goes my input. -Regardless, I think these opinions are valid for the arguments or at least useful in some aspect; If this has been in error, I am happy for this post to be deleted/nuked as appropriate.
Things I hate about this world? One of the things that annoys me the most:
Speciesism. You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx
Am I the only one who sees this gross discrimination?
Then we have sport hunters, people who kill for the sheer joy of killing... Isn't this classed as being psychopathic or something? Why is it different if it's "animals" under the crosshair, and not humans? They have lives, just as humans do, why is it any different taking theirs in such a cruel manner?
Killing for food is an entirely different thing however. Killing for food is a natural process, so long as respect is paid to the being being killed for food... many humans say how cruel wolves/predator species x are so cruel for how they kill their prey...but compare this to how a lot of cattle and such is treated by humans.. if I was a sheep, I'd rather be torn apart by a wolf painfully but quickly, than be kept in a tiny steel cage for several days, then being killed usually quite slowly. And those that work at said places have the nerve to say that it is "humane?" o.O
*sighs*<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> First off, for a slight mood lightening: <a href='http://maddox.xmission.com/hatemail.cgi#PETA' target='_blank'>Maddox on PETA</a>
We charge humans for murder of humans because it's our species. Rarely in nature do two animals of the same species kill eachother, however, they kill other animals all the time.
Animals kill plants all the time too, why doesn't anyone ever defend the plants? Don't eat plants, they have feelings too!...Don't eat animals either, they have feelings like us!...wait, what are we supposed to eat then - how bout we break apart some rock salt and stir together some minerals with it for a nice salty-mineral sandwich?
We also have the privelage (I'd say right, but it's not a right) to kill other animals, because we're the strongest animal (not physically mind you, but there is a reason we can use our brains to kill anything if we need to).
On sentience: This is a philisophical viewpoint and you're not really going to go very far with it. The only way to proof it is consciousness. You're the only one that knows <i>positively, without a doubt</i>, that you have consciousness. We assume all other humans have consciousness because they can tell us, and we look like them (if we look like them - or they look like us - they must be like us).
You'll never be able to proove something does or does not have sentience unless you know it has a consciousness (since that's impossible, you have to go to the next closest thing: it has to tell you it does, like most humans could). I don't see a dolphin plopping out of the water to say, "my good human, I'm not sure you realized this, but I have coherent thought and a consciousness!" anytime soon.
That also doesn't mean all the wolves or sheep in the world aren't sentient...they could be thinking, "Sheep, I want to hunt me some humans...that'd be good eatin'."
[Sheep in exchange for man, because it's a sheep...get it?]
On bigotry: Not a big subject for me...but I always figure: People who don't respect the liberty of other humans, to the level they themselves recieve, in the element of their argument are probably bigots. With special exceptions; such as criminals - who don't actually have as much liberty in the face of the law anyway.
On to conformity: I'd have to agree with...someone ahead of me...lots of people 'conform' only because it's the most efficient/logical/usefull thing to do. Of course, my idea is, do whatever is within the bounds of the law, that suits your tastes. Of course, you should probably also respect others rights and try not to annoy them - but that might be conformity then...wouldn't it?
Ohh wait, then you're conforming with all the people out to annoy other people...
[chances are, whatever you've done, are doing and plan on doing has already been done by someone else]
Insulting conformity because you don't want to conform will just mean you conform with people that don't want to conform, making it technically impossible to not conform. [refer to first paragraph in this section for possible outlook on life]
On people acting dumb: I do this on occasion (of course, I don't mean to say that I'm intelligent in all aspects either, but when someone needs me for something, sometimes I'll go short on it). It covers your bases later, if you go slowly the first time, then if someone asks you to do it again they wont expect a quick job.
Of course, that's just my excuse for not having to look fairly dumb in front of people (which is in itself dumb, because if they can't do it, I'm no worse - but I think in circles like that).
It also takes more work to be smart. I'd rather sit on my butt and play video games than do physics problems to 100% accuracy. That's procrastination though, and if you're mad at people that procrasitnate, I'm sure you can beat yourself up about it, because everyone's done it.
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 05:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 05:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Somethign to add to the debate: how can humans be sure what they are acting on isn't just a higher form of instinct? The line is very blurry, is it not? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yep next time a loud noise scares me I'll pee myself and start jumping up and down while barking.
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 06:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 06:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Somethign to add to the debate: how can humans be sure what they are acting on isn't just a higher form of instinct? The line is very blurry, is it not? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't see how this really effects how animals are treated or viewed.
<!--QuoteBegin-dr.d+Mar 4 2004, 04:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Mar 4 2004, 04:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 4 2004, 05:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 4 2004, 05:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Somethign to add to the debate: how can humans be sure what they are acting on isn't just a higher form of instinct? The line is very blurry, is it not? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yep next time a loud noise scares me I'll pee myself and start jumping up and down while barking. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> That's....that's just awesomely funny. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
[I'm not sure if I'm imagining a guy jumping up and down barking, or a guy turning into a little poodle jumping up and down and barking]
We just feel superior and more intelligent given the fact we can build structures, calculate, and impose theories that will probably eventually show false.
We have invented religion and have incarnated the Messiah in the Human form, because humans are obviously the only self-concious animals on the planet. I can't disagree that some forms are probably not self-concious (uni-cellular forms, possibly insects) but I'd really think other animals can think. Call it instinct if you will, but a dog will know when it is wanted/loved. A dog might not recognize its physical face in a mirror, but that's maybe because they never saw mirrors. Bring a camera back a few centuries and you'd be burned for witchcraft. We've lived all our lives around mirrors, so we know what we look like. I wouldn't know what I would look like if I never saw myself. But a dog would recognize faces he knows (such as his master/whatever)
If he is aware of the living state of another being, I think it can be thought that they would think they are another living being. Sure, they don't necessarily react the same way to a sound, but don't they actually react? Hit a dog, and it will cry. Take care of it and it will wiggle its tail. It often grows its own sense of land limits. They **** to mark their territory, and thus recognize their own scent, thus are aware of a personal mark. It would learn to know its property from other things (for example, a bowl or personal toy) so I think they are smart enough to think about who they are and what they exist for. Without necessarily knowing their physical appearance, but still growing a conscience.
People who try or pretend to know something about a topic and try and pull off an act of intelligence. Not knowing something is fine, pretending to act like you know something is something I sometimes lack patience for.
/Die-Hard-One-Sided/Shallow/Non-Issue Idealogues
People who really don't think for themselves, they kind of let people form their opinions and just regurgitate the information when the moment arrives.
The way I see it, my dog has the ability to learn and communicate and that's good enough. Just becuase we're the only species that makes buildings and planes doesn't make us special. If anything, it makes us outcasts. Every other animal stays in thier own area just fine, we're the oddballs. And look what buildings and airplanes get you... Speaking of hijacking, I'd like to take this back to the first post, what this topic is really about. I'll get bigots over with first. I've never personally used the term bigot or thought of it too much. As we saw in this forum, the definition is a little vauge and hard to agree on. Instead I've just looked at people you call bigots as 'racists' or 'jerks'. Racists/sexists are easy to define; a person who belives that any race/gender/religion is superior than another. I hate everyone in this category with all I've got and have shown it more than once. Everything from the little kid on a NS server who yells the 'n' word when killed, to the Klansman who needs to make the call to Enzyte. They all have self-esteem issues and don't know how to cope with them. Consequently, they are the scum of the earth and if I could I'd take them out back with a 9mm one at a time. Conformists are another bunch of @$$holes that sicken me, most of which belong to cliques and have self-esteem problems. Goths say they hate conformists but won't talk to you unless you act like them. They belive that everyone but them are conformists and unless you act like they do (conform) your a tool of the system. You can't get through to people like this, they won't listen or dought for one second thier wrong. Another bandwagon-hopping group are the atheists. Most of them give up or pretend to not belive in God because they want to be different and fit in with a group (a sign of low self-esteem. Notice a pattern?). They bash Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike then say that the "In God we trust" on a quarter is oppressing them! I go to a high school full of these people so I do know what I'm talking about here. All day long they'll spout off how God is bullsh!t and how I only belive in Him because I'm brainwashed. Then when I tell them that they are just jumping a bandwagon and are doing this to make themselves feel better I get this: "Your such a dumb retard. Hey guys did you here that? Matt says God is real." Then i get swarmed. I'd gladly listen to thier philosophy on why these people belive what they do, but all you hear is the same sh!t over and over: "[Black people] are inferior becase God is white." "You nazi conformist. Your just living a fake life for the Man." "God isn't real. Okay, if He is, summon Him." My point is that these people all need to learn how to blend with other people and make friends on thier own. If you have friends, you won't get these self-esteem problems. Otherwise, every high school in America becomes an oil and water mixture and the country will suffer. Yes, these kids grow up and eventually run the country. Sad, ain't it? So if someone truly doesn't belive in God, fine. It would make for a nice, friendly discussion. If someone's sense of humor is dark and they dress in all balxk, get to know them. They aren't outcasts by choice. If someone thinks white people are superior or don't like Jews, shoot the in the head twice. These types have caused enough damage and its payback time, ****.
<!--QuoteBegin-HairyNevus+Mar 4 2004, 09:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (HairyNevus @ Mar 4 2004, 09:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The way I see it, my dog has the ability to learn and communicate and that's good enough. Just becuase we're the only species that makes buildings and planes doesn't make us special. If anything, it makes us outcasts. Every other animal stays in thier own area just fine, we're the oddballs. And look what buildings and airplanes get you... Speaking of hijacking, I'd like to take this back to the first post, what this topic is really about. I'll get bigots over with first. I've never personally used the term bigot or thought of it too much. As we saw in this forum, the definition is a little vauge and hard to agree on. Instead I've just looked at people you call bigots as 'racists' or 'jerks'. Racists/sexists are easy to define; a person who belives that any race/gender/religion is superior than another. I hate everyone in this category with all I've got and have shown it more than once. Everything from the little kid on a NS server who yells the 'n' word when killed, to the Klansman who needs to make the call to Enzyte. They all have self-esteem issues and don't know how to cope with them. Consequently, they are the scum of the earth and if I could I'd take them out back with a 9mm one at a time. Conformists are another bunch of @$$holes that sicken me, most of which belong to cliques and have self-esteem problems. Goths say they hate conformists but won't talk to you unless you act like them. They belive that everyone but them are conformists and unless you act like they do (conform) your a tool of the system. You can't get through to people like this, they won't listen or dought for one second thier wrong. Another bandwagon-hopping group are the atheists. Most of them give up or pretend to not belive in God because they want to be different and fit in with a group (a sign of low self-esteem. Notice a pattern?). They bash Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike then say that the "In God we trust" on a quarter is oppressing them! I go to a high school full of these people so I do know what I'm talking about here. All day long they'll spout off how God is bullsh!t and how I only belive in Him because I'm brainwashed. Then when I tell them that they are just jumping a bandwagon and are doing this to make themselves feel better I get this: "Your such a dumb retard. Hey guys did you here that? Matt says God is real." Then i get swarmed. I'd gladly listen to thier philosophy on why these people belive what they do, but all you hear is the same sh!t over and over: "[Black people] are inferior becase God is white." "You nazi conformist. Your just living a fake life for the Man." "God isn't real. Okay, if He is, summon Him." My point is that these people all need to learn how to blend with other people and make friends on thier own. If you have friends, you won't get these self-esteem problems. Otherwise, every high school in America becomes an oil and water mixture and the country will suffer. Yes, these kids grow up and eventually run the country. Sad, ain't it? So if someone truly doesn't belive in God, fine. It would make for a nice, friendly discussion. If someone's sense of humor is dark and they dress in all balxk, get to know them. They aren't outcasts by choice. If someone thinks white people are superior or don't like Jews, shoot the in the head twice. These types have caused enough damage and its payback time, ****. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You know what I hate?
Generalized stereotyping.
...especially when there are no hints that the person thinks there's the possibility they could be wrong with their stereotype (in totality...as in their stereotype doesn't even cover 50% of the group they're speaking of).
I also hate people with the excessive 1s and ones with the sux!!!1 (etc.)...okay, we get it, you're trying to mock counter-strike players, few of who ever write that way anyway. Especially when it's unnecessary...or when you purposely spell things wrong...also trying to be mocking.
<a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=64801' target='_blank'>This</a> would be a good example. The art looks okay, but I can't stand the text in almost any of those text boxes...especially in CWAG's...no offense intended at his intellect, as I've seen him intelligently discuss things before (same with DiscoZombie...sure it's supposed to be sub-culture, but when have you ever seen anyone type Aliums as an actual meaning?).
But why do you have to do it!?
Now, you'll all be like, "We're trying to be funny [or satirical]!"...but it's so blatantly well known, you should file it with the Department of Redundancy Department. Once you use a 3 (for e) or u (for you) I just drift off and barely pay attention (or not at all...).
You're using a keyboard that's capable of writing 50 times faster than a pencil and paper, you can use all the letters provided.
[edit] on par with the "What I love" topic, I love people who form coherent paragraphs, they're easier to read.[edit]
Love does not last forever. Our minds are plagued by fear and suffering. That is the way we are designed; for survival.
As you grow, your mind sees images, some appealing, some not. The mistake some people make is how they treat images. Some feel that if they are not willing to embrace an image that they should condemn it. That's wrong. All images should be accepted because they are apart of life, and as long as the image does not harm life, it should not be condemned.
But as for what girlfriend or boyfriend you chose, that is YOUR choice and you are free to choose an appealing image to embrace. If you were to try and overlook an attribute that you deep down felt was important, your distaste would develop later. It's only a matter of time. You are only human. Some like blondes, others like brunettes; there's nothing wrong with a preference.
When it comes to real love such things should not matter but if a person chooses not to love you because of a simple physical attribute, it prompts the question, "Is this a person that deserves my love?"
As for conformists I think you mean bandwagoners, and coat-tailers; people who either mindlessly follow a leader or concept, or do so because they feel it will benefit them as an individual. But if you are posting on this board, you are a conformist. You obviously live in a country that has electricity, which means you have a government, and governments have rules. You are following those rules and thus you are a conformist.
But you are not a mindless bandwagoner or coat-tailer. You conform because you UNDERSTAND and BELIEVE that by conforming that you benefit the order of your government. And by conforming you are supplied with a lifestyle that is adequate. You could go against the rules tomorrow and kill a child but you realize there is no benefit to you, the child, or the society as a whole by performing such an act.
Finally regarding ignoramuses, I would like to say that intelligence is highly overrated, especially by geeks who typically strive for it. If you look through history, successful leaders have rarely been people who were the most intelligent. It has always been the people with the love, and true heart for what they were doing that succeeded in their goals. Intelligence alone does not guarantee success. It must be tempered with wisdom and love.
When we kill an animal intentionally, we are taking its life away. That animal, that was once alive, was capable of <i>enjoying</i> its life furthur, but we take any chance of it enjoying life again away when we kill it. It doesn't matter how intelligent it is, it could still enjoy life.
Examples:
If a baby is born with a defect, so it has no capabilty to talk or conceptualize beyond basic ideas, would you kill it and eat it for it's meat?
A pig is born with the ability to talk, the ability to appreciate and create art, to understand jokes, and think logically. This pig enters our society and becomes extremely popular. Would you consider it right to kill it?
Your answers to both questions are probably no. Both creatures are capable of enjoying life, so we don't kill them. That is why I think the majority of the planet is guilty of specieism.
I still have never heard a good arguement why we should not kill animals/eat meat. You guys have any?
I wouldn't eat the baby because I don't like human flesh, but I would consider it's death euthanasia since it would never be a complete human being.
You argue that an animal can enjoy it's life, I argue that it doesn't. It only operates on basic instincts, the only reason it runs from a predator is because it has instincts to survive, not because it wants to enjoy a nice walk in the park the next day.
Dogs show us affection because we feed them and provide them shelter, not because they think we're delightful people.
Again dogs, pigs, deer are not self-aware that means it would be really hard for them to enjoy a life they were not aware of having.
<!--QuoteBegin-dr.d+Mar 5 2004, 01:24 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Mar 5 2004, 01:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Again dogs, pigs, deer are not self-aware that means it would be really hard for them to enjoy a life they were not aware of having. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Using your own arguement, the baby would only work on instinct, never "aware" that it had a life. Therefore, killing it would have no impact and would be a perfectly moral thing to do. However, that's just a flaw of the arguement, not saying that I agree with it.
You don't have to be aware of something to enjoy it:
I enjoy gravity, since it keep me from flying away, yet I do not understand it.
Therefore I think that animals need not know that they have a life or self, to be able to enjoy it. The dog eats food, and he is happy that he is full. He wags his tail. The cow lays down to sleep in some warm hay, and is glad that it can rest. When we kill the animal, we remove their ability to feel these emotions of happiness.
Since we have no clue what happens to them, we cannot say that their current situation is worse than what they will go to after death, and thus have no moral right to kill them.
Did you just completely miss the part where I said killing a baby with no self-awarness is not morally wrong and should be considered euthanasia?
And our emotions are chemical reactions in our brains that simply do not happen in cows, I'm sorry but happy cows do not exist, Cows with portholes into their stomachs however do.
<!--QuoteBegin-Burr+Mar 5 2004, 01:12 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burr @ Mar 5 2004, 01:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <i>I hate everything about you Why do I love you You hate everything about me Why do you love me
I hate You hate I hate You love me
I hate everything about you Why do I love you</i> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> teh song = win.
This was talked about a little while back so I just figured I'd adress it. The reason we punish other human beings for killing humans is instincual revenge. Probably the strongest human instinct is simply the instinct to survive. When someone kills someone else, thier actions imply that they belive that they should have the power to decide weather or not other people live or die. To a person like this, our insintual response is to resist them because we value our own lives instinctually, and thus are violently insulted by this person who inarguably inplys that he is capable of desiding the value of our lives with greater athourity then we have over ourselfs. Thus our subconcious effects our concious and in effect we belive that the killer has crossed a moral line, and thus we want to punish him as a sociaty.
That would be my guess as to what we actually find so offensive about murder. The belief that killing one and other is as humans is wrong is a seemingly univeral concept that every sociaty has initially built into it. Thus I find the only logical explination is that humans are in some way instinctually opposed to killing among thier own species. Clearly we can also think of concious reasons why killing other people is wrong, expecially in our sociaties context. But concious reasoning can easily be misinformed (that is obviously what is happening for psycopaths), thus the concept of killing ones own kind being wrong, would probaly not universially exist if it were intirely based on supirior senteiant thought.
"I still have never heard a good arguement why we should not kill animals/eat meat. You guys have any? " I eat meat; It's a natural process. I pay the utmost respect to the creature that died so I may eat, however. If I put myself in the hooves of a deer; I would be more than happy to die knowing that my flesh fed a a family and kept them alive and happy. But then again, I believe death is not the end, more a transition.
As for animals being self-aware, I'm pretty sure they are. Then again I did once live a life as one, but then again, that isn't considered "evidence" is it.
To add to the list: I hate humans who proclaim that everythign about is is chemicals/electrical impulses, and there is nothing else, or those who proclaim that humans are the only creatures with a soul. Both just really irritate me.
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 04:48 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 04:48 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To add to the list: I hate humans who proclaim that everythign about is is chemicals/electrical impulses, and there is nothing else <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Or in some unfortunate cases, imbalances...
Comments
<!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Speciesism.
You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder
You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You kill a sentient being wrongly, you get charged with murder.
You kill a non-sentient being wrongly, you get asked to pay a fine.
Seems fine to me, unless you go ape on the non-sentient being killing, and then the penalty needs to get harsher.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[begin rant]
OK, seriously, no offence to you in general, but it's this viewpoint I hate also; the view that only humans are sentient, because other species do not "show any signs of it"...
In reality, the only reason humans say that they are the only sentient species, is it pleases their ego. That's what it boils down to. I mean if you check the definition of sentient, it's very unspecific when it comes to species, isn't it? I checked this before.. According to the definition most animal species are indeed sentient..
<a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience' target='_blank'>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience</a>
I see no specific mention of humans there... do you?
[Bad example but whatever]
If I was to kill your brother/mother/sister/whaetver claiming it was "ok" because I believed he/she wasn't sentient, you'd be royally ****ed off at me, yes? But as far as I could tell, he/she wasn't sentient, because he/she "showed no signs of it" from my perspective.....but then again, it's just an easy excuse, isn't it?
How can humans hoenstly say what is and isn't sentient, when they can't even prove THEY are truely sentient? Have they actually worked out what sentience is created by?
I very very much doubt they have.
[/end rant]
<!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Speciesism.
You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder
You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You kill a sentient being wrongly, you get charged with murder.
You kill a non-sentient being wrongly, you get asked to pay a fine.
Seems fine to me, unless you go ape on the non-sentient being killing, and then the penalty needs to get harsher.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[begin rant]
OK, seriously, no offence to you in general, but it's this viewpoint I hate also; the view that only humans are sentient, because other species do not "show any signs of it"...
In reality, the only reason humans say that they are the only sentient species, is it pleases their ego. That's what it boils down to. I mean if you check the definition of sentient, it's very unspecific when it comes to species, isn't it? I checked this before.. According to the definition most animal species are indeed sentient..
<a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience' target='_blank'>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience</a>
I see no specific mention of humans there... do you?
[Bad example but whatever]
If I was to kill your brother/mother/sister/whaetver claiming it was "ok" because I believed he/she wasn't sentient, you'd be royally ****ed off at me, yes? But as far as I could tell, he/she wasn't sentient, because he/she "showed no signs of it" from my perspective.....but then again, it's just an easy excuse, isn't it?
How can humans hoenstly say what is and isn't sentient, when they can't even prove THEY are truely sentient? Have they actually worked out what sentience is created by?
I very very much doubt they have.
[/end rant] <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're the bloke who thinks he's a wolf, eh? No wonder you're annoyed.
<!--QuoteBegin-Marine01+Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Marine01 @ Mar 4 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 5 2004, 03:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Speciesism.
You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder
You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You kill a sentient being wrongly, you get charged with murder.
You kill a non-sentient being wrongly, you get asked to pay a fine.
Seems fine to me, unless you go ape on the non-sentient being killing, and then the penalty needs to get harsher.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[begin rant]
OK, seriously, no offence to you in general, but it's this viewpoint I hate also; the view that only humans are sentient, because other species do not "show any signs of it"...
In reality, the only reason humans say that they are the only sentient species, is it pleases their ego. That's what it boils down to. I mean if you check the definition of sentient, it's very unspecific when it comes to species, isn't it? I checked this before.. According to the definition most animal species are indeed sentient..
<a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience' target='_blank'>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentience</a>
I see no specific mention of humans there... do you?
[Bad example but whatever]
If I was to kill your brother/mother/sister/whaetver claiming it was "ok" because I believed he/she wasn't sentient, you'd be royally ****ed off at me, yes? But as far as I could tell, he/she wasn't sentient, because he/she "showed no signs of it" from my perspective.....but then again, it's just an easy excuse, isn't it?
How can humans hoenstly say what is and isn't sentient, when they can't even prove THEY are truely sentient? Have they actually worked out what sentience is created by?
I very very much doubt they have.
[/end rant] <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Other animals are not sentient because they don't possess self awarness they operate on basic instincts and self perservation. So no offense to you in particular but most people that have an idea that animals are sentient have seen too many Disney movies.
Personally I would hate for animals gain self awarness, no telling what would happen if chimps suddenly realized they were mere puppets in a world of man
/me here distant Planet of the Apes theme music.
PS I think killing a human who is no longer sentient isn't murder either, people in comas and people who are brain dead do not qualify as sentient.
Try reading the definition again for "sentient", no offence, I think you may have misread it <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Try reading the definition again for "sentient", no offence, I think you may have misread it <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sentience : Being self-aware. E.g not acting on instinct, knowing you exist.
Sapience : Being clever (pretty much).
It has been proven AFAIK that virtually no (if any) land animals are sentinet, e.g if you put a mirror infront of them they'll probably attack it because they think its someone else.
Not that i'm arguing with you, i believe in most of what you have said.
However, I do believe other animals are concious of their senses. I've personally never been of another species, and probably never will be, but I feel it absurd we would be the only ones aware of our environment. It's not because we have developped opposable thumbs and can communicate in words that we are the only ones able to think for real. The problem is, they are unaware of the other's act. For example, you go buy a dog, so the dog is yours for a few green pieces of paper. Does the dog know you now "own him"? probably not, but he is going to grow affection and understand you're somehow linked to him (provided you're a good master) If you think about it this way, some animals are using us in some way without us knowing. I'm not saying they enslave us, but somehow are parasites, and we are just mere "puppets" for THEIR existence.
btw, anyone saying humans are the dominating species on the world is horribly wrong
Because i have the instinct to punch people all the time yet i dont <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
it is, and you are correct.
but we've got something extra in the form of sentience.
Things I hate about this world? One of the things that annoys me the most:
Speciesism.
You kill a human wrongly, you get charged with murder
You kill an "animal" wrongly, you get charged $xx
Am I the only one who sees this gross discrimination?
Then we have sport hunters, people who kill for the sheer joy of killing... Isn't this classed as being psychopathic or something? Why is it different if it's "animals" under the crosshair, and not humans? They have lives, just as humans do, why is it any different taking theirs in such a cruel manner?
Killing for food is an entirely different thing however. Killing for food is a natural process, so long as respect is paid to the being being killed for food... many humans say how cruel wolves/predator species x are so cruel for how they kill their prey...but compare this to how a lot of cattle and such is treated by humans.. if I was a sheep, I'd rather be torn apart by a wolf painfully but quickly, than be kept in a tiny steel cage for several days, then being killed usually quite slowly. And those that work at said places have the nerve to say that it is "humane?" o.O
*sighs*<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First off, for a slight mood lightening: <a href='http://maddox.xmission.com/hatemail.cgi#PETA' target='_blank'>Maddox on PETA</a>
We charge humans for murder of humans because it's our species. Rarely in nature do two animals of the same species kill eachother, however, they kill other animals all the time.
Animals kill plants all the time too, why doesn't anyone ever defend the plants? Don't eat plants, they have feelings too!...Don't eat animals either, they have feelings like us!...wait, what are we supposed to eat then - how bout we break apart some rock salt and stir together some minerals with it for a nice salty-mineral sandwich?
We also have the privelage (I'd say right, but it's not a right) to kill other animals, because we're the strongest animal (not physically mind you, but there is a reason we can use our brains to kill anything if we need to).
On sentience: This is a philisophical viewpoint and you're not really going to go very far with it. The only way to proof it is consciousness. You're the only one that knows <i>positively, without a doubt</i>, that you have consciousness. We assume all other humans have consciousness because they can tell us, and we look like them (if we look like them - or they look like us - they must be like us).
You'll never be able to proove something does or does not have sentience unless you know it has a consciousness (since that's impossible, you have to go to the next closest thing: it has to tell you it does, like most humans could). I don't see a dolphin plopping out of the water to say, "my good human, I'm not sure you realized this, but I have coherent thought and a consciousness!" anytime soon.
That also doesn't mean all the wolves or sheep in the world aren't sentient...they could be thinking, "Sheep, I want to hunt me some humans...that'd be good eatin'."
[Sheep in exchange for man, because it's a sheep...get it?]
On bigotry:
Not a big subject for me...but I always figure: People who don't respect the liberty of other humans, to the level they themselves recieve, in the element of their argument are probably bigots. With special exceptions; such as criminals - who don't actually have as much liberty in the face of the law anyway.
On to conformity:
I'd have to agree with...someone ahead of me...lots of people 'conform' only because it's the most efficient/logical/usefull thing to do. Of course, my idea is, do whatever is within the bounds of the law, that suits your tastes. Of course, you should probably also respect others rights and try not to annoy them - but that might be conformity then...wouldn't it?
Ohh wait, then you're conforming with all the people out to annoy other people...
[chances are, whatever you've done, are doing and plan on doing has already been done by someone else]
Insulting conformity because you don't want to conform will just mean you conform with people that don't want to conform, making it technically impossible to not conform. [refer to first paragraph in this section for possible outlook on life]
On people acting dumb:
I do this on occasion (of course, I don't mean to say that I'm intelligent in all aspects either, but when someone needs me for something, sometimes I'll go short on it). It covers your bases later, if you go slowly the first time, then if someone asks you to do it again they wont expect a quick job.
Of course, that's just my excuse for not having to look fairly dumb in front of people (which is in itself dumb, because if they can't do it, I'm no worse - but I think in circles like that).
It also takes more work to be smart. I'd rather sit on my butt and play video games than do physics problems to 100% accuracy. That's procrastination though, and if you're mad at people that procrasitnate, I'm sure you can beat yourself up about it, because everyone's done it.
Yep next time a loud noise scares me I'll pee myself and start jumping up and down while barking.
I don't see how this really effects how animals are treated or viewed.
Yep next time a loud noise scares me I'll pee myself and start jumping up and down while barking. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's....that's just awesomely funny. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
[I'm not sure if I'm imagining a guy jumping up and down barking, or a guy turning into a little poodle jumping up and down and barking]
We have invented religion and have incarnated the Messiah in the Human form, because humans are obviously the only self-concious animals on the planet. I can't disagree that some forms are probably not self-concious (uni-cellular forms, possibly insects) but I'd really think other animals can think. Call it instinct if you will, but a dog will know when it is wanted/loved. A dog might not recognize its physical face in a mirror, but that's maybe because they never saw mirrors. Bring a camera back a few centuries and you'd be burned for witchcraft. We've lived all our lives around mirrors, so we know what we look like. I wouldn't know what I would look like if I never saw myself. But a dog would recognize faces he knows (such as his master/whatever)
If he is aware of the living state of another being, I think it can be thought that they would think they are another living being. Sure, they don't necessarily react the same way to a sound, but don't they actually react? Hit a dog, and it will cry. Take care of it and it will wiggle its tail. It often grows its own sense of land limits. They **** to mark their territory, and thus recognize their own scent, thus are aware of a personal mark. It would learn to know its property from other things (for example, a bowl or personal toy) so I think they are smart enough to think about who they are and what they exist for. Without necessarily knowing their physical appearance, but still growing a conscience.
People who try or pretend to know something about a topic and try and pull off an act of intelligence. Not knowing something is fine, pretending to act like you know something is something I sometimes lack patience for.
/Die-Hard-One-Sided/Shallow/Non-Issue Idealogues
People who really don't think for themselves, they kind of let people form their opinions and just regurgitate the information when the moment arrives.
Speaking of hijacking, I'd like to take this back to the first post, what this topic is really about. I'll get bigots over with first.
I've never personally used the term bigot or thought of it too much. As we saw in this forum, the definition is a little vauge and hard to agree on. Instead I've just looked at people you call bigots as 'racists' or 'jerks'. Racists/sexists are easy to define; a person who belives that any race/gender/religion is superior than another. I hate everyone in this category with all I've got and have shown it more than once. Everything from the little kid on a NS server who yells the 'n' word when killed, to the Klansman who needs to make the call to Enzyte. They all have self-esteem issues and don't know how to cope with them. Consequently, they are the scum of the earth and if I could I'd take them out back with a 9mm one at a time.
Conformists are another bunch of @$$holes that sicken me, most of which belong to cliques and have self-esteem problems. Goths say they hate conformists but won't talk to you unless you act like them. They belive that everyone but them are conformists and unless you act like they do (conform) your a tool of the system. You can't get through to people like this, they won't listen or dought for one second thier wrong. Another bandwagon-hopping group are the atheists. Most of them give up or pretend to not belive in God because they want to be different and fit in with a group (a sign of low self-esteem. Notice a pattern?). They bash Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike then say that the "In God we trust" on a quarter is oppressing them! I go to a high school full of these people so I do know what I'm talking about here. All day long they'll spout off how God is bullsh!t and how I only belive in Him because I'm brainwashed. Then when I tell them that they are just jumping a bandwagon and are doing this to make themselves feel better I get this: "Your such a dumb retard. Hey guys did you here that? Matt says God is real." Then i get swarmed.
I'd gladly listen to thier philosophy on why these people belive what they do, but all you hear is the same sh!t over and over: "[Black people] are inferior becase God is white." "You nazi conformist. Your just living a fake life for the Man." "God isn't real. Okay, if He is, summon Him."
My point is that these people all need to learn how to blend with other people and make friends on thier own. If you have friends, you won't get these self-esteem problems. Otherwise, every high school in America becomes an oil and water mixture and the country will suffer. Yes, these kids grow up and eventually run the country. Sad, ain't it? So if someone truly doesn't belive in God, fine. It would make for a nice, friendly discussion. If someone's sense of humor is dark and they dress in all balxk, get to know them. They aren't outcasts by choice. If someone thinks white people are superior or don't like Jews, shoot the in the head twice. These types have caused enough damage and its payback time, ****.
Speaking of hijacking, I'd like to take this back to the first post, what this topic is really about. I'll get bigots over with first.
I've never personally used the term bigot or thought of it too much. As we saw in this forum, the definition is a little vauge and hard to agree on. Instead I've just looked at people you call bigots as 'racists' or 'jerks'. Racists/sexists are easy to define; a person who belives that any race/gender/religion is superior than another. I hate everyone in this category with all I've got and have shown it more than once. Everything from the little kid on a NS server who yells the 'n' word when killed, to the Klansman who needs to make the call to Enzyte. They all have self-esteem issues and don't know how to cope with them. Consequently, they are the scum of the earth and if I could I'd take them out back with a 9mm one at a time.
Conformists are another bunch of @$$holes that sicken me, most of which belong to cliques and have self-esteem problems. Goths say they hate conformists but won't talk to you unless you act like them. They belive that everyone but them are conformists and unless you act like they do (conform) your a tool of the system. You can't get through to people like this, they won't listen or dought for one second thier wrong. Another bandwagon-hopping group are the atheists. Most of them give up or pretend to not belive in God because they want to be different and fit in with a group (a sign of low self-esteem. Notice a pattern?). They bash Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike then say that the "In God we trust" on a quarter is oppressing them! I go to a high school full of these people so I do know what I'm talking about here. All day long they'll spout off how God is bullsh!t and how I only belive in Him because I'm brainwashed. Then when I tell them that they are just jumping a bandwagon and are doing this to make themselves feel better I get this: "Your such a dumb retard. Hey guys did you here that? Matt says God is real." Then i get swarmed.
I'd gladly listen to thier philosophy on why these people belive what they do, but all you hear is the same sh!t over and over: "[Black people] are inferior becase God is white." "You nazi conformist. Your just living a fake life for the Man." "God isn't real. Okay, if He is, summon Him."
My point is that these people all need to learn how to blend with other people and make friends on thier own. If you have friends, you won't get these self-esteem problems. Otherwise, every high school in America becomes an oil and water mixture and the country will suffer. Yes, these kids grow up and eventually run the country. Sad, ain't it? So if someone truly doesn't belive in God, fine. It would make for a nice, friendly discussion. If someone's sense of humor is dark and they dress in all balxk, get to know them. They aren't outcasts by choice. If someone thinks white people are superior or don't like Jews, shoot the in the head twice. These types have caused enough damage and its payback time, ****. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You know what I hate?
Generalized stereotyping.
...especially when there are no hints that the person thinks there's the possibility they could be wrong with their stereotype (in totality...as in their stereotype doesn't even cover 50% of the group they're speaking of).
I also hate people with the excessive 1s and ones with the sux!!!1 (etc.)...okay, we get it, you're trying to mock counter-strike players, few of who ever write that way anyway. Especially when it's unnecessary...or when you purposely spell things wrong...also trying to be mocking.
<a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=64801' target='_blank'>This</a> would be a good example. The art looks okay, but I can't stand the text in almost any of those text boxes...especially in CWAG's...no offense intended at his intellect, as I've seen him intelligently discuss things before (same with DiscoZombie...sure it's supposed to be sub-culture, but when have you ever seen anyone type Aliums as an actual meaning?).
But why do you have to do it!?
Now, you'll all be like, "We're trying to be funny [or satirical]!"...but it's so blatantly well known, you should file it with the Department of Redundancy Department. Once you use a 3 (for e) or u (for you) I just drift off and barely pay attention (or not at all...).
You're using a keyboard that's capable of writing 50 times faster than a pencil and paper, you can use all the letters provided.
[edit] on par with the "What I love" topic, I love people who form coherent paragraphs, they're easier to read.[edit]
Love does not last forever. Our minds are plagued by fear and suffering. That is the way we are designed; for survival.
As you grow, your mind sees images, some appealing, some not. The mistake some people make is how they treat images. Some feel that if they are not willing to embrace an image that they should condemn it. That's wrong. All images should be accepted because they are apart of life, and as long as the image does not harm life, it should not be condemned.
But as for what girlfriend or boyfriend you chose, that is YOUR choice and you are free to choose an appealing image to embrace. If you were to try and overlook an attribute that you deep down felt was important, your distaste would develop later. It's only a matter of time. You are only human. Some like blondes, others like brunettes; there's nothing wrong with a preference.
When it comes to real love such things should not matter but if a person chooses not to love you because of a simple physical attribute, it prompts the question, "Is this a person that deserves my love?"
As for conformists I think you mean bandwagoners, and coat-tailers; people who either mindlessly follow a leader or concept, or do so because they feel it will benefit them as an individual. But if you are posting on this board, you are a conformist. You obviously live in a country that has electricity, which means you have a government, and governments have rules. You are following those rules and thus you are a conformist.
But you are not a mindless bandwagoner or coat-tailer. You conform because you UNDERSTAND and BELIEVE that by conforming that you benefit the order of your government. And by conforming you are supplied with a lifestyle that is adequate. You could go against the rules tomorrow and kill a child but you realize there is no benefit to you, the child, or the society as a whole by performing such an act.
Finally regarding ignoramuses, I would like to say that intelligence is highly overrated, especially by geeks who typically strive for it. If you look through history, successful leaders have rarely been people who were the most intelligent. It has always been the people with the love, and true heart for what they were doing that succeeded in their goals. Intelligence alone does not guarantee success. It must be tempered with wisdom and love.
Examples:
If a baby is born with a defect, so it has no capabilty to talk or conceptualize beyond basic ideas, would you kill it and eat it for it's meat?
A pig is born with the ability to talk, the ability to appreciate and create art, to understand jokes, and think logically. This pig enters our society and becomes extremely popular. Would you consider it right to kill it?
Your answers to both questions are probably no. Both creatures are capable of enjoying life, so we don't kill them. That is why I think the majority of the planet is guilty of specieism.
I still have never heard a good arguement why we should not kill animals/eat meat. You guys have any?
You argue that an animal can enjoy it's life, I argue that it doesn't. It only operates on basic instincts, the only reason it runs from a predator is because it has instincts to survive, not because it wants to enjoy a nice walk in the park the next day.
Dogs show us affection because we feed them and provide them shelter, not because they think we're delightful people.
Again dogs, pigs, deer are not self-aware that means it would be really hard for them to enjoy a life they were not aware of having.
Using your own arguement, the baby would only work on instinct, never "aware" that it had a life. Therefore, killing it would have no impact and would be a perfectly moral thing to do. However, that's just a flaw of the arguement, not saying that I agree with it.
You don't have to be aware of something to enjoy it:
I enjoy gravity, since it keep me from flying away, yet I do not understand it.
Therefore I think that animals need not know that they have a life or self, to be able to enjoy it. The dog eats food, and he is happy that he is full. He wags his tail. The cow lays down to sleep in some warm hay, and is glad that it can rest. When we kill the animal, we remove their ability to feel these emotions of happiness.
Since we have no clue what happens to them, we cannot say that their current situation is worse than what they will go to after death, and thus have no moral right to kill them.
And our emotions are chemical reactions in our brains that simply do not happen in cows, I'm sorry but happy cows do not exist, Cows with portholes into their stomachs however do.
<img src='http://www.vetmed.vt.edu/Organization/Academic/openhouse/img2003/cow.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Why do I love you
You hate everything about me
Why do you love me
I hate
You hate
I hate
You love me
I hate everything about you
Why do I love you</i>
Why do I love you
You hate everything about me
Why do you love me
I hate
You hate
I hate
You love me
I hate everything about you
Why do I love you</i> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
teh song = win.
I hate loneliness. That is all.
</twentysomethingangster>
That would be my guess as to what we actually find so offensive about murder. The belief that killing one and other is as humans is wrong is a seemingly univeral concept that every sociaty has initially built into it. Thus I find the only logical explination is that humans are in some way instinctually opposed to killing among thier own species. Clearly we can also think of concious reasons why killing other people is wrong, expecially in our sociaties context. But concious reasoning can easily be misinformed (that is obviously what is happening for psycopaths), thus the concept of killing ones own kind being wrong, would probaly not universially exist if it were intirely based on supirior senteiant thought.
Freedom of Will, as long as you dont do things against other people Will's.
While making live bearable.
I eat meat; It's a natural process. I pay the utmost respect to the creature that died so I may eat, however.
If I put myself in the hooves of a deer; I would be more than happy to die knowing that my flesh fed a a family and kept them alive and happy. But then again, I believe death is not the end, more a transition.
As for animals being self-aware, I'm pretty sure they are. Then again I did once live a life as one, but then again, that isn't considered "evidence" is it.
To add to the list: I hate humans who proclaim that everythign about is is chemicals/electrical impulses, and there is nothing else, or those who proclaim that humans are the only creatures with a soul. Both just really irritate me.
Or in some unfortunate cases, imbalances...