|
Bull-fighting: Disgusting or Part of Culture? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| TranceSeeker |
Its a shame they do such things to an animal, where did this animal deserve this to be foltered like that.
Culture or not, I feel sorry for the bull, he suffers so bad.
If one kills a person, I laugh my ass off. |
|
|
| Orbax |
Now you are just purposefully misinterpreting my words. You willfully ignore the message I am trying to convey. When I say HERE i meant this specific post at this specific time and you know that.
You support Apartheid.
where did that come from? You obviously have to have some logical basis for that kind of stuff. I worked up to my point through logic and example, while you are just trying to be an ass. Im not going to sit here and spell out the human way of reasoning to statements and opinion for you. If you dont understand the procedure, you are mentally handicapped in some way, because the process is intrinsically ingrained into humans by the way we live and socially interact every day. Even inferential logic require some premises to make a conclusion from.
Im merely the one who has good reasons to believe what I believe. It isnt that I know more information or have a better "quality" of information, I just use it more constructively. I never said I dont take you guys seriously and I didnt doubt for a moment you were openminded. In fact I never said anything to even make a leap to that from. The fact the people repeat their teachers, be they teachers from several decades ago, or thoughts they learned in class today, they still need to incorporate that knowledge into their schema of the world and into the structure of their own thoughts, instead of just having this rootless stone of a thought sitting in your brain. Plant it, nurture it, and then let that bear its own fruit from your mind. If people wanted facts, they would read a book. People are more fascinated by the workings of the human mind than the repetitions and parroting of another. |
|
|
| Nook |
| my opinion is simple, it is disgusting. i saw one of those bullfights on tv and it really is disgusting, also disturbing that people enjoy the 'show'. |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
| quote: |
screw culture. This is morality we are talking about. Moral progress is something that is worked for. So yes, it would be a step towards becoming a more moral nation. Just because we might consider it wrong doesnt mean we are the people judging it. We are merely the ones applying an action to the stratified superstructure of morality and seeing how it fits in. Anyone may do this. People "justify" it by saying something worse could happen if they didnt die like this. They get to live longer. So you are asking to choose between two evils. Why not abolish both brutal ways? Life can be more painful than death in many ways, so prolonging its life may very well be more cruel than cutting it short. No person would want to die that way period, so why force that upon lesser creatures? They think and feel, and the last moments of their life are nothing but rage and terror. There is a reason why the rest of the civilized world doesnt participate in public slaughter for enjoyment. Its twisted. The whole point of it is to make the matador look cool. He wants respect. He wants to be prideful. Its like a serial killer who kills to get a hard on, but this emotionally and socially stimulates them, so its even more addictive. I think their aggressive energies should be spent lifting themselves out of a terrible economy instead of killing stuff.
|
Is morality somthing subjective and individual or a common consens of society on certain rules how to behave, how to treat each other. I guess it's a mixture of both. Noone except for myself knows better what I like and how I wanna be treated, how I wanna live my life etc. From my point of view prostitution isnt immoral, but probably the old woman next to me thinks that it is. Since we dont really know if theres something like THE moral, the truth, the way it just has to be, a dogmatic almighty guide "how to behave" we'll have to find a compromise. Me and the gramma as a part of my culture, and the apnish gramma and 18 year old with their.
Look, in some cultures polygamy isnt immoral. Some countries have death penalty in cases where women cheat on their husbands, some dont. The law maninly reflects the society's attitude towards specific problems. We dont have a golbal society (yet) so how shouldnt we have a golbal maorality? Morality is directly link to the place I live in, to its history and traditions. Hence it's hard if not impossible, or at least unfair to j..
Wait a minute. There IS one thing, maybe the only one, that all intelligent human beings should agree on: dignity of human life. That has to stand aboe everything, this must be the topic of morality.
okay. Since we havent agreed on the ethnic status of animals we can leave it up to the culture-related morality views. So yes, it IS unfair judging them.
hm..sorry for the confusion ;) |
|
|
| Orbax |
#1 just because we dont know what the true moral code is doesnt mean we cant work towards it. The closer the get the more understanding of it we may gain. And even if we never gain the truth, the battle will be well fought, and society will benefit from such concepts as "Dont torture animals to get sexually stimulated" (not thatthis is what bullfighters do) but if nothing else you can look at "morality" as the thing which benefits society most in the long run. Public spectacles of death and torture hurt the society. It gives feelings of power, agression, and hate, that are undirected, and thus will vent out in the path of least resistence. Madrid has some of the worst crime in Europe. Im not saying its linked to bullfighting per say but the latent unchecked agression in such an act must be looked at.
when you say polygamy is moral, that actually doesnt neccessarily cancel out the moral that monogamy is meant to impress. The moral is to love your wife as your own flesh, and raise her above all things. If a man with 3 wives can treat each equally and have equal respect for them he doesnt really cancel out the basic precept of loving your wife more than any other. |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
Moral code, hehe..That was the word i was looking for. Forgive me the fact the english is not my native language. Ill still do my best and express my views in a somewhat understandable way.
I agree that we should never stop and rely on the things we have achieved, whether it is politically, econimically or morally. That is the basic idea of life: being part in a constant change and improvement..(spiritual)evolution.
But its not as easy as u make u it. Of course you could say, for the sake of the "true global moral code" u Spanish should stop with your bull fights. As I said they see it with different eyes. They dont wanna see an animal killed, they wanna see the astehtic war against they symbolized evil. Yet an animal gets tortured and killed after all and I agree with you that objectively this is something immoral. Using the "Public spectacles of death and torture hurt the society" argument, however, they could actually claim an end of Hollywood-Action movies, Box fights or Wrestling shows in the US. Now if the U
s and other countires with smiliar things agree on that united step against inscenated violence everything would be alright. Since it sounds utopic, it remains unfair to call only one side to stop something such important for their tradition.
that brings us back to "illegtimate to judge other cultures" point. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
Look Obrax, I am not going to state my moral opinions in this post (well I might, who knows). But this one is aimd at critizing and examining your morality.
You who proclaim yourself the light bearer to thought show a lot of ill-thought posts and annoucements, which really cause me to laugh.
Here I will point it out for you:
someone:"No culture can judge another cultures morals and/or values and/or traditions from their own perspective."
you: "*sniffs air* I think I sense a moral relativist!"
me: This would be anti-moral relativisim. Get your terms checked.
you: Just because someone also does something wrong doesnt mean that the other persons wrong is therefor expiated.
me: I strongly belive that one's wrongs can be expiated due to the actions of another's wrongs. Here you have to bring in a different type of moral value, but it still can be done with integrity.
My example; War. A nation has a right to self-defense and the killing of another nations 'humans' once aggressed upon. I think they are justified in killing the other nation's soldiers, and this expiates the fundamental wrong of killing a man. Israel has a right to retaliate when the Palestinians use suicide bombers, the Palestinians have no right to use suicide bombers (from a ethical perspective). America has a right to kill Al Queda terrorist, Al Queda terrorist have no right to kill US civilians. Serbia has a right to kill terrorist rebels. Rebels have no right of killing serbian civilians. America had a right to kill Nazis, the Nazis had no right killing Jews.. this can go on and on and on.
Me killing plants, still leaves me with the moral integrity I think the call Hitler a genocidal crazed idiotic maniac which the earth would have been better without. I don't know, I know it is hard for me to be the judge of 'morality' since I am no God. But I feel extremly confident when introduced with the facts to say, "Yes I think Hitler was morally wrong and was a ed up son of a bitch". If that makes me some type of perverted lunatic and hypocrate, well I think their is something wrong with you. But bar that if me saying Hitler was evil brands me with hate from you, I will still take this stand. I must be really in immoral huh?
you: "well heck, if you took some classes in it you must be a bonafied expert"
me: well heck, if you read some books in it you must be a bonafied expert, huh?
you: "I dont care that some people get offended that animals are killed for food. It increases quality of life and living for our species."
me: This is your opinion, not a conclusion of the observation of fact and thought. It can be held eitherway regarding this specific argument.
you: " 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."
me: dammit man, pick which 'camp' your on. One moment your with the moral relativist saying TWO plus TWO equals FOUR, and then in another instance you call them hippies. For God sake, you can't be playing both sides of the fence if one of them is a moral relativist. And by the way, I fail to see how the invention of beer would not make us leave caves.
you: "That is because I have heard no better or orginal thought than that which I speak."
me: hey thats my line, stop stealing it from me. I am the narcisstic bastard not you... I'm so cool and stuff, really I am.
you: "You may retort that I am espousing ideas and holding to them"
me: how about if i 'retort' that you are espousing ideas and not holding to them? hmm. doh you didn't seem to mention an explination for that, all orginal thought one.
you: "Just because you hear does not mean you should listen, and just because you listen does not mean you should believe it."
me: Finaly some great advice. I would advice all others in this thread to use this advice when listening to the words of the all orginal thought one, Obrax.
you: "Think people! use your minds!"
me: But, if oh all orginal thought one, I do.. you might not like it and then call me close-minded when in fact you seem to think everyone in the world is wrong and you are right, which is usually a classic sympton of paraniod schizorphenic delussions of grandiousity.
you: "People here are just talking about what their teachers told them"
me: People here deserved a right to their own opinion, personally I am usually tilt to side of thousands of years of thought and experience as opposed to your views. But again, I agree with you, we all have a mind and it would be a waste not to use it. I question everything, then I usually except it if it makes sense to me. Your ramblings currently do not.
you" "where did that come from? You obviously have to have some logical basis for that kind of stuff. I worked up to my point through logic and example, while you are just trying to be an ass. Im not going to sit here and spell out the human way of reasoning to statements and opinion for you. If you dont understand the procedure, you are mentally handicapped in some way, because the process is intrinsically ingrained into humans by the way we live and socially interact every day. Even inferential logic require some premises to make a conclusion from."
me: You seem to be the mentally handicapped. Humans do not think in a logical form. Although perhaps we should, we do not, and it is quiet helpful in many ways that we do not, and a hinderence and others. But at least I am not blinded to the beliefe the people think logically.. lol, what history/philosophy have you been reading? seriously.
Ok well thats enough hacks at you, perhaps it will show you that their are other ways, and that perhaps moral realtivism indeed does exist in some areas, and is absent of others.
Yoepus
Remember beer has food value, food has absolutely no beer value. |
|
|
| Orbax |
you do dang well for it not being your native tongue ;)
Ok, so the fact that it is wrong to do has been established. The whole question of whether or not we should ask them to stop such an act while not stopping those immoral acts which we commit is another moral question entirely :) |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
Look Obrax, I am not going to state my moral opinions in this post (well I might, who knows). But this one is aimd at critizing and examining your morality. |
you must be God then! whats it feel like to be divine?
| quote: | | You who proclaim yourself the light bearer to thought show a lot of ill-thought posts and annoucements, which really cause me to laugh. |
I never proclaimed myself the light bearer, merely the bearer of sharp ideas to prod the mind into activity.
| quote: | Here I will point it out for you:
someone:"No culture can judge another cultures morals and/or values and/or traditions from their own perspective."
you: "*sniffs air* I think I sense a moral relativist!"
me: This would be anti-moral relativisim. Get your terms checked. |
you are bass akwards on that. Moral relativism thinks that no one can judge anyone else.
| quote: | you: Just because someone also does something wrong doesnt mean that the other persons wrong is therefor expiated.
me: I strongly belive that one's wrongs can be expiated due to the actions of another's wrongs. Here you have to bring in a different type of moral value, but it still can be done with integrity.
My example; War. A nation has a right to self-defense and the killing of another nations 'humans' once aggressed upon. I think they are justified in killing the other nation's soldiers, and this expiates the fundamental wrong of killing a man. Israel has a right to retaliate when the Palestinians use suicide bombers, the Palestinians have no right to use suicide bombers (from a ethical perspective). America has a right to kill Al Queda terrorist, Al Queda terrorist have no right to kill US civilians. Serbia has a right to kill terrorist rebels. Rebels have no right of killing serbian civilians. America had a right to kill Nazis, the Nazis had no right killing Jews.. this can go on and on and on.
Me killing plants, still leaves me with the moral integrity I think the call Hitler a genocidal crazed idiotic maniac which the earth would have been better without. I don't know, I know it is hard for me to be the judge of 'morality' since I am no God. But I feel extremly confident when introduced with the facts to say, "Yes I think Hitler was morally wrong and was a ed up son of a bitch". If that makes me some type of perverted lunatic and hypocrate, well I think their is something wrong with you. But bar that if me saying Hitler was evil brands me with hate from you, I will still take this stand. I must be really in immoral huh? |
lol wtf are you ranting about. I never said hitler was good. Your proclamation against him agrees with my statement whole heartedly and I thank you for agreeing with me and coming over to my side.
| quote: | you: "well heck, if you took some classes in it you must be a bonafied expert"
me: well heck, if you read some books in it you must be a bonafied expert, huh? |
where did that come from? I never said I read a book. That would be going against my whole argument to use an argument from a book against the espousing of ideas that you didnt contribute to in some way. Read again foo
| quote: | you: "I dont care that some people get offended that animals are killed for food. It increases quality of life and living for our species."
me: This is your opinion, not a conclusion of the observation of fact and thought. It can be held eitherway regarding this specific argument. |
and educated opinion friend. if you think we should all be hippies living off grass and you DONT think that animal proteins being ingested is a good idea, then you can go live in a commune with all your greasy haired friends :)
| quote: | you: " 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."
me: dammit man, pick which 'camp' your on. One moment your with the moral relativist saying TWO plus TWO equals FOUR, and then in another instance you call them hippies. For God sake, you can't be playing both sides of the fence if one of them is a moral relativist. And by the way, I fail to see how the invention of beer would not make us leave caves. |
wow. you are dumb. I m against moral relativism. The TWO plus TWO is FOUR statement means that there is truth DESPITE WHATEVER PEOPLE BELEIVE. And the failing of understanding beer means you have no sense of humor because it was a joke
| quote: | you: "That is because I have heard no better or orginal thought than that which I speak."
me: hey thats my line, stop stealing it from me. I am the narcisstic bastard not you... I'm so cool and stuff, really I am. |
no...you are not.
| quote: | you: "You may retort that I am espousing ideas and holding to them"
me: how about if i 'retort' that you are espousing ideas and not holding to them? hmm. doh you didn't seem to mention an explination for that, all orginal thought one. |
Ill retort you are an idiot and cannot understand what I speak. I had no contradictions. You are merely a fool trying to prove his own intelligence by battering futiley at the walls of the gifted.
| quote: | you: "Just because you hear does not mean you should listen, and just because you listen does not mean you should believe it."
me: Finaly some great advice. I would advice all others in this thread to use this advice when listening to the words of the all orginal thought one, Obrax. |
spelled my name wrong #1, and #2 the act of choosing or not choosing is itself a choice and you must read what I have written to choose against it, thus provoking a thought of whether or no to choose it thus my goal is achieved.
| quote: | you: "Think people! use your minds!"
me: But, if oh all orginal thought one, I do.. you might not like it and then call me close-minded when in fact you seem to think everyone in the world is wrong and you are right, which is usually a classic sympton of paraniod schizorphenic delussions of grandiousity. |
I didnt say you were wrong I said you were an unthinking idiot. I made a general garment of words and you claim it fits you? Ok then.
| quote: | you: "People here are just talking about what their teachers told them"
me: People here deserved a right to their own opinion, personally I am usually tilt to side of thousands of years of thought and experience as opposed to your views. But again, I agree with you, we all have a mind and it would be a waste not to use it. I question everything, then I usually except it if it makes sense to me. Your ramblings currently do not. |
thousands of years of thought? eh? wow. Its my understanding that we have different ideas than the ancient greeks and babylonians. I didnt know we were still teaching the four elements of wind, water, fire, and earth in school.
| quote: | you" "where did that come from? You obviously have to have some logical basis for that kind of stuff. I worked up to my point through logic and example, while you are just trying to be an ass. Im not going to sit here and spell out the human way of reasoning to statements and opinion for you. If you dont understand the procedure, you are mentally handicapped in some way, because the process is intrinsically ingrained into humans by the way we live and socially interact every day. Even inferential logic require some premises to make a conclusion from."
me: You seem to be the mentally handicapped. Humans do not think in a logical form. Although perhaps we should, we do not, and it is quiet helpful in many ways that we do not, and a hinderence and others. But at least I am not blinded to the beliefe the people think logically.. lol, what history/philosophy have you been reading? seriously. |
hate to break it to you but whether or not people understand the process of how they arrive at thought, there is a logical process. Whether or not the logical reasoing is sound and cohesive is another issue.
| quote: | | Ok well thats enough hacks at you, perhaps it will show you that their are other ways, and that perhaps moral realtivism indeed does exist in some areas, and is absent of others. |
Moral relativism always exists. Its still stupid. I dont think you understand what moral relativism is...re read the posts. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| hmm I was a little harsh in some of those. /shrugs. guess im in a bad mood or something. |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
Tip: Beer
:thepirate |
|
|
| Orbax |
ohh man good call. Im gonna get me some Guinness |
|
|
|
|
