|
Bull-fighting: Disgusting or Part of Culture? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Tranex02 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dmatrox
before you posted that tranex, i thought bull fighting was when two bulls are going at it, ya know, like fighting...:rolleyes: both are sad. |
yea, i guess if you never heard of such a thing, one would automatically asume that it's a fight between 2 bulls.... |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceGiant
I agree, it is a part of their culture, a very important one. I wouldnt dare to d´judge them without knowing their perspective. They see with with totally different eyes, its not about watching a bull get stabbed but a very philosophical thing. The fight against the evil..bla bla..it has histroical referrences as well..and has a lot to do with aesthtetics and stuff.
let them continue their traditions. :thepirate |
Well, your argument could have been used to defend burnings of witches in the middle ages, burning of widows in India some hundred years ago, or barbaric customs in the third world nations. I believe that people ín developed countries, where the level of ignorance is pretty low, cannot excuse bestowing pain and suffering on animals "just for fun" or because it is part of ones national identity. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | | No culture can judge another cultures morals and/or values and/or traditions from their own perspective. I learned about it in anthropology (I forget the correct term for it). Our perspectives on what they believe are completely warped and we cannot relate to what they do. |
*sniffs air* I think I sense a moral relativist!
What you just said about society is called moral relativism. That would mean if everyone BELIEVED the earth was flat then it would actually be so. That is not the case. Belief in NO WAY justifies the reality. Moral relativism is the most pathetic view of morality. The whole idea contains a contradiction. namely that the same action can be both right and wrong at the same time depending on the belief of the tribe. here is another one
Tribe X believs itself to be morally right, tribe Y believes tribe X to be morally wrong. Therefore the morality of tribe X is relative to the belief of the tribe.
If it is true that one and the same action can be both right and wrong at the same time or at different times, and assuming that each case of moral judgement is a factually correct assertion of the speakers feelings, then it will follow that when two or more persons appear to disagree they do not genuinely disagree. But in point of observed fact people DO genuinely disagree therefore protagorian relativism is False.
that whole statement makes morality too easy or too impossible. If there is no consensus on whether or not it is moral how can a judgement be made? Think about it. You have a tie. Half think its right, half think its wrong. So if mere belief in the rightness of it makes it right what then. How do you decide what is moral? There has to be some universal construct you lay it against.
It makes the concept of moral progress meaningless. There can be no such thing as a moral reformer. |
|
|
| rupert |
I dont think anyone who eats meat has a right to criticise Spain for bullfighting. It would perhaps be the pot calling the kettle black.
As a Vegan I am opposed to the killing of any animals. Period.
But, Western consumer society has divorced the killing from the eating. In many ways the bullfighter has a lot greater respect for the cow than the guy rocking up to MacDonalds for his Quarter Pounder.
The bull might die in pain, put at least he has a theoretical chance of killing the fighter. The cow at the abbatoir doesnt get that chance. |
|
|
| Spad |
I'm sorry but it's sick and pointless. Why don't they just put 2 blokes in there and let them fight it out?
It is NOT the same as eating meat. I strongly believe that we're just animals, and as such part of the food chain. We have a responsibility not to cause uneccesary suffering, but saying that we should live by different rules to other species is stupid. We all started off the same, if monkeys suddenly worked out how to farm animals would we stop them doing it? Would we say it's wrong? No, because it's part of nature, the way the world works.
But causing suffering for our own amusment is just wrong, we're supposed to be intelligent. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| bull rupert. Just because someone also does something wrong doesnt mean that the other persons wrong is therefor expiated. every single human on this earth does something wrong. Therefore how can anyone say the holocaust was wrong? You kill plants you sick bastard how can you judge the nazis burning the jews? Bad argument through and through. EVERY person has the right to judge actions. And anyways who said what we do is right? WE might think we are doing something wrong and do it anyways to continue the survival of our society in a more productive way. So, ok, we are doing something wrong. Evil knows evil if you want to take that route. Either way, we get to judge. It an antiquated and outdated mode of prideful killing. Yeah, they respect the bull because it makes people like them. What a great way to get chicks, torture and then stick a sword into it. |
|
|
| The Greek |
| the term is called ethnocentrism, and its when you think your own culture is the best and everything gets compared to and judged. and orbax, dont make it sound like the whole spanish male population is out to become a matador, because that getting chicks line was pretty dumb. i just finished two semesters of cultural and biological anthropology this year, and what youre saying clearly falls under ethnocentrism. let them continue their traditions. why do we always have to base the standard to the most sensitive person's views, just to make sure we dont offend anyone? let them have bullfights. as long as its not affecting the species' population, theres no reason to stop it just because you dont approve of. yes, i might sound cruel and barbaric, but thats your opinion and youre entitled to it. for one thing, i dont think people should own guns. why do we in this country so vehemently oppose any gun control? because people hear like to hunt and just plain old like to collect weapons. its all a matter of opinion, let it be. |
|
|
| Spad |
| Please stop using big words. We're not all intelligent. |
|
|
| Orbax |
well heck, if you took some classes in it you must be a bonafied expert. This has nothing to do with ethnocentrism. I think a lot of things we do are wrong too. And that getting chicks line wasnt dumb. These guys do it for respect, power and position. and that is all done to get women. If women didnt exist men would still be living in caves and the only thing we would have invented is beer. I dont care that some people get offended that animals are killed for food. It increases quality of life and living for our species. If you want to call me species centric you can, but I think the survival of the human race is more important than some peoples petty concerns. So it isnt a case of the most sensitive individual getting his way.
As long as it doesnt affect the population of the species?! what planet are you from? Dropping live puppies into vats of boiling water for pleasure doesnt hurt the canine species. In fact it might help it because there are way too many dogs. It isnt because I dont approve. It is because if you look at the whole reasoning behind it , the effect of it, the experience, it is possible to make an answer. If I said TWO plus TWO is FOUR would it be just my opinion? And if you dont think there are strict moral codes that apply and exist despite belief or disbelief in them, you are in the moral relativist camp, and you and your petty band can continue living in the wilderness railing against humanity for advancing.
The reason we protest against gun control is because it is in our constitution. We were promised a thing, and some believe a promised thing is being taken away. again, morals. A promise is a promise and what not. If the constitution promised a whore for every man, we might not care if the promise is broken because there is a higher moral code at work then a promise being fulfilled. At that point we wouldnt want the promised object. Morality is not for the faint of heart who just want everything to be groovy and people are people and they can do whatever they want. Thats called having a weak character. Not being strong enough to stand up and say THIS IS WRONG. Your kind of thinking is exactly what let the Nazis into power. |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
hey hey hey..Orbax, this is a very interesting discussion- why destroy it with personal attacks like "Your kind of thinking is exactly what let the Nazis into power."
? |
|
|
| Orbax |
because it drives the point home in a way that stimulates thought.
and its true. I can say it in a more round about way like "The thoughts which you express, which may or may not be yours, are what let the nazis into power"
it doesnt have what I will call "Coruso" or the "bite which provokes thought" that the other does. Im trying to break people out of the little concrete shells they have built around themselves and open their minds. You may retort that I am espousing ideas and holding to them. That is because I have heard no better or orginal thought than that which I speak. People here are just talking about what their teachers told them, the ultimate sponges: "Squeeze me!" they shriek gleefully, "hear what everyone has told me!". People need to take more responsibility for their opinions than merely "It was spoken and my eardrums rattled around so I listened". Just because you hear does not mean you should listen, and just because you listen does not mean you should believe it. I want people to come up with their own stuff, using fun and creative examples like the nazi party. Think people! use your minds! |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
You support Apartheid.
(was that fun, creative, provocating or stimulating for a further discussion?)
You should accept other people's opinions and not act like the one who knows it all better. You aint the forum's "mind-opener" and I believe that the majortiy of the guys on this board are mature, open-minded and smart enough to be taken seriously by you ("People here are just talking about what their teachers told them"). |
|
|
|
|
