I Called In Sick Today

[timwakefield 68]

That cow I ate last night only lived a few years because it was going to be killed for its meat. Would I be more of an animal lover if I preferred that the cow never be born in the first place? Ask a vegan if she's comfortable with the fact that if everyone went vegan, many of the animals they're trying to save would become endangered. Cows, pigs, sheep, goats, etc...they're brought into the world by humans for specific purposes.

That's a very weak argument from you. Theorizing on the possible existence or non-existence or abundance or non-abundance of certain animals is looking for an excuse. You're right, if humans didn't raise cattle then there would almost certainly be far far fewer cattle on the planet then there currently are. So what? I should cry for the fact that individual organisms are never born? That's ludicrous. Ohh what a shame that some genetically engineered subset of some species never comes into existence? Not so much. When I say genetically engineered I don't mean crazy modern science - purebred dogs are genetically engineered, and have been for thousands of years. Basically, I don't see how a person can lament the non-existence of an animal that never existed.

I of course believe that farm animals should be treated as well as possible while they're alive, which is why whenever I can I'm careful about what I eat in terms of where it comes from.

That's all well and good, and supporting/eating farm-raised free-range animals probably adds less suffering to the world than eating factory-raised animals, but it's a tiny percentage of the animal products humans consume.

I'm not sure eating meat is as hypocritical as you think it is. That said, I think it's possible that at some point in the distant future people will look back on meat eating as barbaric.

Nature is cruel, I'm not overlooking that. Animals eat each other, and there's no way I would ever look on that practice as wrong or evil. But the amount of suffering caused to animals by humans is enormous. Would chickens rather have almost no chickens on the planet, or would they rather be meat for humans? It's not really a reasonable question. The choice is not actually being offered - chickens can't make complex decisions or even begin to understand the question, and again, arguing that an animal is lucky to have even been born despite their impending life of padlocked slavery seems illogical to me. How would a chicken feel about the fact that it doesn't exist? The same way your son feels about the fact that he doesn't exist - there are no feelings, there are no longings or desires or hopes, because there is no existence for that organism.

Do you mean you "for some reason" you responded rationally or "for some reason" I was sarcastic? Or for some reason you missed out on the fact that I am pretty good at not being funny?Oh well, I don't think you have to be Jainist to be an animal lover.

I mean that I responded "for some reason."

[speedz99 145]

We scale our treatment of living things based on how similar their consciousness appears to ours, from monkeys to dogs to ants to corn.

Yeah, another way to stump vegans who get all high and mighty on you is to ask how they feel about pest control. Oh, all living things are beautiful and deserve to be allowed to live their lives...except insects? Because they're marginally less intelligent than cows, which are marginally less intelligent than us?

*except for cats, which for some reason were bred to annoy us in a way that is attractive to old lonely women who hoard things

I love the fact that cats haven't been bred to live for our affection. I do miss having a dog though...I'm very close to attempting to foster to see if having one in my current situation could work out.

[timwakefield 68]

Yeah, another way to stump vegans who get all high and mighty on you is to ask how they feel about pest control. Oh, all living things are beautiful and deserve to be allowed to live their lives...except insects? Because they're marginally less intelligent than cows, which are marginally less intelligent than us?

Meh, you're giving hypothetical attributes to imaginary vegans and then calling them out on it. I only know one vegan, and he's a very good friend of mine, and he doesn't kill bugs on purpose. Ever. I'm not saying he's right or that he's morally superior to me, but he takes his beliefs seriously and doesn't just pretend.

[speedz99 145]

Basically, I don't see how a person can lament the non-existence of an animal that never existed.

I'll ignore your first paragraph, because...yikes. As for this sentence, I'm not sure if you're referring to the disappearance of a species, or the one cow I ate. Would I have missed it if it never existed? No. But that doesn't mean I think that it would be better off having never existed. And the cow's welfare is what we're discussing here, right?

That's all well and good, and supporting/eating farm-raised free-range animals probably adds less suffering to the world than eating factory-raised animals, but it's a tiny percentage of the animal products humans consume.

We're not talking about all humans, we're talking about me and whether or not I'm a hypocrite if I say I'm an animal lover.

Nature is cruel, I'm not overlooking that. Animals eat each other, and there's no way I would ever look on that practice as wrong or evil. But the amount of suffering caused to animals by humans is enormous. Would chickens rather have almost no chickens on the planet, or would they rather be meat for humans? It's not really a reasonable question. The choice is not actually being offered - chickens can't make complex decisions or even begin to understand the question, and again, arguing that an animal is lucky to have even been born despite their impending life of padlocked slavery seems illogical to me. How would a chicken feel about the fact that it doesn't exist? The same way your son feels about the fact that he doesn't exist - there are no feelings, there are no longings or desires or hopes, because there is no existence for that organism.

I'm making the decision for the chicken. She would rather live for a few years, laying eggs and being a chicken, and then be killed and fried to a crispy golden brown. Again, not very hard to understand unless you want to get all existential about it, which you obviously do. I do not, because it leads to unanswerable questions and annoying circular logic.

[speedz99 145]

Meh, you're giving hypothetical attributes to imaginary vegans and then calling them out on it.

Not really. I go to school with a bunch of them, have met some of their friends who are also vegans, and have had many discussions with them about it. Usually they're good people and we can have interesting and mutually beneficial conversations about it that doesn't include judging on either end, but occasionally it can get ugly because some of them do think they're better than non-vegans and like to flaunt it. Which is when I point out their own hypocrisies and they typically get all flustered and angry. It's good stuff.

I only know one vegan, and he's a very good friend of mine, and he doesn't kill bugs on purpose. Ever. I'm not saying he's right or that he's morally superior to me, but he takes his beliefs seriously and doesn't just pretend.

Well I'm sure the one vegan you know is a very nice guy.

[timwakefield 68]

I'm making the decision for the chicken. She would rather live for a few years, laying eggs and being a chicken, and then be killed and fried to a crispy golden brown. Again, not very hard to understand unless you want to get all existential about it, which you obviously do. I do not, because it leads to unanswerable questions and annoying circular logic.

I think it's extremely hard to understand, and you are making wild leaps. Would she rather be born into a life of unending torture, or not be born? None of these questions have simple, obvious answers, which is my point.

Not really. I go to school with a bunch of them, have met some of their friends who are also vegans, and have had many discussions with them about it. Usually they're good people and we can have interesting and mutually beneficial conversations about it that doesn't include judging on either end, but occasionally it can get ugly because some of them do think they're better than non-vegans and like to flaunt it. Which is when I point out their own hypocrisies and they typically get all flustered and angry. It's good stuff.Well I'm sure the one vegan you know is a very nice guy.

Sure, most/all vegans are probably hypocrites too, I was just pointing out a counter-example. It probably wasn't fair of me to call your vegans 'hypothetical,' especially since I've heard you making fun of their half-assed beliefs before.

[speedz99 145]

I think it's extremely hard to understand, and you are making wild leaps. Would she rather be born into a life of unending torture, or not be born? None of these questions have simple, obvious answers, which is my point.

Maybe our disconnect here is the "unending torture" thing. That's inconsequential in our discussion of my personal hypocrisy, as I've already said I'm as careful as possible about where my meat comes from. If you want to argue that my eating meat when I go to a restaurant procludes me from being an animal lover because it might come from a farm where it was mistreated, fine.

[timwakefield 68]

I'll ignore your first paragraph, because...yikes. As for this sentence, I'm not sure if you're referring to the disappearance of a species, or the one cow I ate. Would I have missed it if it never existed? No. But that doesn't mean I think that it would be better off having never existed. And the cow's welfare is what we're discussing here, right?

Not sure what was yikes about my first paragraph, but in answer to your question, I'm referring to both the disappearance of a species and of an individual, because I thought you were giving both of those as examples of why it's okay to raise animals for slaughter - because it creates more individuals and creates/aids the survival of entire species. But I wasn't asking if you would have missed the cow, I was asking if the cow would have missed itself, and suggesting that any organism in any situation is better of having existed than not is, I think, oversimplifying a very complicated question.

Maybe our disconnect here is the "unending torture" thing. That's inconsequential in our discussion of my personal hypocrisy, as I've already said I'm as careful as possible about where my meat comes from. If you want to argue that my eating meat when I go to a restaurant procludes me from being an animal lover because it might come from a farm where it was mistreated, fine.

You're not precluded from loving animals just because you eat them, but I think it's worthwhile to recognize that eating them has, at best, questionable benefits for the individual animals being eaten as well as their whole species.

[speedz99 145]

But I wasn't asking if you would have missed the cow, I was asking if the cow would have missed itself, and suggesting that any organism in any situation is better of having existed than not is, I think, oversimplifying a very complicated question.

I'm not saying any organism in any situation, I'm saying that cow I recently ate. I feel like that is a very simple question.

You're not precluded from loving animals just because you eat them, but I think it's worthwhile to recognize that eating them has, at best, questionable benefits for the individual animals being eaten as well as their whole species.

The individual animal being eaten was only alive in the first place so it could be eaten. The species has a large population and is generally healthy because it has been propagated for the same purpose. I don't question either of those facts.

[brvheart 1,752]

Yes, you are. You're lying...or you just aren't really think about this. There's no way you're selfish enough to request that your family save $5000 instead of getting to spend an extra few months with you.

I said that I wouldn't want to spend the money. I didn't say my wife wouldn't force me to.

[speedz99 145]

I said that I wouldn't want to spend the money. I didn't say my wife wouldn't force me to.

The following scenario is too unrealistic for us to bother continuing to discuss:Doctor: I'm sorry, but you're dying.Brv: Sweet!Doctor: What? Uh, so, as I was saying, you have two months to live. You actually would die tomorrow, but thanks to recent medical advances we can slow the progression of the disease, and you should be relatively pain free until the end.Brv: Oh, I guess I can wait a few months. How much will the treatment cost?Doctor: You have great insurance, so it will only cost you five thousand dollars.Brv: Well that certainly won't do. Forget the treatment, I'm ready to go now.Mrs. Brv: Are you fucking kidding me? Brv: Fine, be that way. But don't blame me when you can't take the kids on vacation next year.

[timwakefield 68]

I'm not saying any organism in any situation, I'm saying that cow I recently ate. I feel like that is a very simple question.

What exactly are you asking about the cow you recently ate?

[speedz99 145]

What exactly are you asking about the cow you recently ate?

Really?

[timwakefield 68]

Really?

I don't know why you're getting pissy, and I don't know why you think these questions all have obvious, simple answers. So yes, please tell me what exactly you are asking because it's unclear.EDIT: "Would the cow I ate last night have been better off if it had never been born" appears to be the question you are asking, but you said that your question was "very simple," and to me that question is extremely complicated and philosophical, thus I am confused.

[brvheart 1,752]

The following scenario is too unrealistic for us to bother continuing to discuss:Doctor: I'm sorry, but you're dying.Brv: Sweet!Doctor: What? Uh, so, as I was saying, you have two months to live. You actually would die tomorrow, but thanks to recent medical advances we can slow the progression of the disease, and you should be relatively pain free until the end.Brv: Oh, I guess I can wait a few months. How much will the treatment cost?Doctor: You have great insurance, so it will only cost you five thousand dollars.Brv: Well that certainly won't do. Forget the treatment, I'm ready to go now.Mrs. Brv: Are you fucking kidding me? Brv: Fine, be that way. But don't blame me when you can't take the kids on vacation next year.

I didn't want to discuss it in the first place, but you thought I was lying.I will admit that the scenario I am discussing has so many different possibilities that it's ridiculous and my particular hypothetical would have to included a) knowing I was going to die for sure b) not having enough life insurance or savings that 5k would have been a big deal. For instance, if I die, my wife won't care about 5k, which will come into play in the decision. I simply don't care about living a couple months with a condition that will almost certainly not be fun (since it's killing me).

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

The following scenario is too unrealistic for us to bother continuing to discuss:Doctor: I'm sorry, but you're dying.Brv: Sweet!Doctor: What? Uh, so, as I was saying, you have two months to live. You actually would die tomorrow, but thanks to recent medical advances we can slow the progression of the disease, and you should be relatively pain free until the end.Brv: Oh, I guess I can wait a few months. How much will the treatment cost?Doctor: You have great insurance, so it will only cost you five thousand dollars.Brv: Well that certainly won't do. Forget the treatment, I'm ready to go now.Mrs. Brv: Are you fucking kidding me? Brv: Fine, be that way. But don't blame me when you can't take the kids on vacation next year.

Mrs. Brv: Can you at least hang out until a week from Wednesday? We need someone to watch the kids on Ladies Book Club night.

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

I didn't want to discuss it in the first place, but you thought I was lying.I will admit that the scenario I am discussing has so many different possibilities that it's ridiculous and my particular hypothetical would have to included a) knowing I was going to die for sure b) not having enough life insurance or savings that 5k would have been a big deal. For instance, if I die, my wife won't care about 5k, which will come into play in the decision. I simply don't care about living a couple months with a condition that will almost certainly not be fun (since it's killing me).

For the record, I understand what you're saying and don't think it's unreasonable. I'm not sure you'd be able to actually do it if the occasion were to arise, but I can understand your position.

[speedz99 145]

I don't know why you're getting pissy, and I don't know why you think these questions all have obvious, simple answers. So yes, please tell me what exactly you are asking because it's unclear.EDIT: "Would the cow I ate last night have been better off if it had never been born" appears to be the question you are asking, but you said that your question was "very simple," and to me that question is extremely complicated and philosophical, thus I am confused.

I'm not getting pissy, I just couldn't understand what you didn't understand. I've already said a number of times that I think it's very simple...the cow was better off having lived. I know you disagree with my assessment that it's a simple question to answer, but I don't know what else to tell you. I'm sure you enjoy trying to wrap your head around existential questions, but I just don't think this one is worthy of much discussion. Yes, living on a farm for two years and then dying is better than not being born in the first place. Cows on good farms seem relatively happy. They eat, they fuck, they nap...it's not so bad. Of course there are bad experiences in their lives as well, including the end, but I think it's clear that the good experiences outweight the bad (again, talking about properly run farms). This, to me, is clearly better than a lack of existence, which is, by definition, completely neutral. Good > Neutral. Edit: I should have gone with, "I'll tell you when I'm getting pissy."

I didn't want to discuss it in the first place, but you thought I was lying.

And I still do, but that's ok.

[speedz99 145]

For the record, I understand what you're saying and don't think it's unreasonable. I'm not sure you'd be able to actually do it if the occasion were to arise, but I can understand your position.

I think it's unreasonable for $5k. Maybe not $100K. So I guess everyone draws the line somewhere.

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

I think it's unreasonable for $5k. Maybe not $100K. So I guess everyone draws the line somewhere.

Yeah, that's what I'm alluding to with the "not sure you could actually do it" part.

[timwakefield 68]

I'm not getting pissy, I just couldn't understand what you didn't understand. I've already said a number of times that I think it's very simple...the cow was better off having lived. I know you disagree with my assessment that it's a simple question to answer, but I don't know what else to tell you. I'm sure you enjoy trying to wrap your head around existential questions, but I just don't think this one is worthy of much discussion. Yes, living on a farm for two years and then dying is better than not being born in the first place. Cows on good farms seem relatively happy. They eat, they fuck, they nap...it's not so bad. Of course there are bad experiences in their lives as well, including the end, but I think it's clear that the good experiences outweight the bad (again, talking about properly run farms). This, to me, is clearly better than a lack of existence, which is, by definition, completely neutral. Good > Neutral.

I actually agree with a lot of this, but the problem is that you undoubtedly eat processed food as well, or meat that you don't know how the animal was raised. I think that makes you kind of hypocritical - that you consume products that were created from animals that lived objectively dreadful lives. I mean I'm sure your vegan friends (because they're annoying girls) have told you all about horrible conditions on massive farms. But you're able to ignore it, because if you examine the fact that chickens are absolutely suffering inhumane (inchickenable?) conditions, living lives of pain and suffering so that we can consume them for pleasure, you have to realize it's hypocritical to pretend to care about their happiness. That is the interesting and complicated philosophical question - how fair or reasonable is it for us to treat dumber animals like that? And I think you steered the conversation away from that to make a point about happy free-range animals. But surely you know that most animal products aren't made that way, including many of the ones you consume unless you're insanely diligent, and to me those are the products/practices worth discussing. Now let me clarify that this is not meant as a major attack on you. One of the first things I said is that I'm as big a hypocrite as anybody, because I purport to care about animals and yet I contribute to practices that cause unnecessary suffering to animals. All of us are. There's nothing wrong about being a hypocrite sometimes, which I think is another interesting subject for consideration. The reason I called you out is obviously the vet thing, but that was just an excuse to entice you to reply. You are far less of a hypocrite than me if you put any energy at all into consuming farm-raised, happy meat (I just eat it), but if you don't acknowledge that all them poor little chickens locked in their depressing shit-covered cages are, from their point of view, gaining very little from the situation, then I think you're just ignoring it because it's unpleasant.

[strategy 4]

has tim always been this argumentative?

[Theraflu 1,035]

has tim always been this argumentative?

I don't think so, but once he picks a topic, he doesn't let up.

[Roll the Bones 74]

Dang, you guys are making me hungry.

[timwakefield 68]

has tim always been this argumentative?

Only when I'm bored. Which I'm not now that you're here!