Your Paragon of Virtue Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Triumph of the Will. Watch it sometime. Reference to what, the cynicism comment?
Guest Failed Mascot Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 I did see one guy with no eyes/nose, just a big hole. He popped in a prosthesis and it somehow looked even more disturbing. Ripley's Believe it or Not, correct? You got it, chief He reminded me of a Mr. Potato Head gone wrong.
Slayer Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 I sure hope Paragon doesn't break his neck falling off his high horse
Guest Failed Mascot Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 If he does can we make fun of his debilitating condition?
Nevermortal Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 I sure hope Paragon doesn't break his neck falling off his high horse Yeah, legit LOL from me, not enough for the LMAO, but good going.
Nighthawk Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Of course it is. Human beings ARE animals, we have the benefit of civilization and technology to help us, and it's arrogant of our species to believe that we are indeed superior. Then again, everything balances out when I hear about wild animals attacking and killing humans, who are a genetically inferior race to many other species on this planet. Follow this logic closely. It's self defeating.
Guest Vitamin X Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 I know what you're saying, but what I'm getting at is the human race as a species is genetically inferior to most other animals on the planet except for in terms of civilization/technology. But otherwise, it's arrogant of our species to believe that animals should be viewed as lesser beings simply because they don't possess the same capabilities in terms of civilization/technology.
Your Paragon of Virtue Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 If I break my neck from falling off of my high horse then I deserve to be made fun of. I shouldn't have been up there in the first place. Human beings aren't inferior at all. We have the privilege of possessing will and intellect, animals don't have. That's infinitely more valuable then big claws. Well, I guess not infinitely, but you know what I mean. Anyway, animals are lesser beings, which is why we can eat them without feeling guilty, unless you're in PETA.
Guest Vitamin X Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 But the problem from the human perspective is that animals are frequently viewed as lesser beings, incapable of possessing ANY intellect or social structure at all, which is ridiculously false. And if you put any regular human being out in the wild to try and survive on their own, many if not most wouldn't survive unless they had help. Humans work well mostly only in groups, but certainly not as individual creatures. I'm certainly not any kind of PETA vegetarian or anything, but I do advocate animal rights as being equal to human rights, considering the fact that they don't possess the intellect we do, it's not that difficult. We can eat them without feeling guilty as a result of us being on top of the food chain (again, not due to our superior natural hunting ability, but in our ability to create technology which helps us achieve our goals), but using that same logic, you could also make an argument in favor of cannibalization, since "lesser" humans possessing less education and technology are inferior and therefore are okay to kill and eat.
Nighthawk Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Your second argument only works if you accept your first argument. For one, you talk as if our ability to create technology is unnatural. If we have managed to place ourselves atop of the biological totem pole, why shouldn't we be arrogant? Either we were ordained to be there, or we fought and earned it through inherant superiority (which our ability to create technology demonstrates). Whichever way you look at it, we're number one.
Cherry Blossom Viscount Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Why do people try ever so hard to be overly cruel on the internet? Half of the things said in this thread would dare not be uttered on the streets. I don't get the obsession with trying to be the "cool heel" of some messageboard.
Nighthawk Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Well, duh. People want to say those things but they can't for fear of reprimand. Here there is none.
Guest Vitamin X Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Your second argument only works if you accept your first argument. For one, you talk as if our ability to create technology is unnatural. If we have managed to place ourselves atop of the biological totem pole, why shouldn't we be arrogant? Either we were ordained to be there, or we fought and earned it through inherant superiority (which our ability to create technology demonstrates). Whichever way you look at it, we're number one. Hmm, good point you're right. I hadn't thought of my saying that our ability to create technology is unnatural, because well that's the only thing we have that really seperates us. I still can't believe I tried to rationalize cannibalizing. Probably shouldn't try to post when I'm hungry.
Guest TheLastBoyscout Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 A certain Billy Idol song comes to mind ... Yeah, I was thinking "Mony Mony" too.
Guest TheLastBoyscout Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 If I break my neck from falling off of my high horse then I deserve to be made fun of. I shouldn't have been up there in the first place. No you don't. What's wrong with riding a horse if you don't mistreat it?
Slayer Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 Paragon was just helping his horse over the fence
Nighthawk Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 What's the point of riding a horse if you don't mistreat it?
Guest TheLastBoyscout Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 What's the point of riding a horse if you don't mistreat it? Perhaps it's the best mode of transport.
Nighthawk Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 But can't you punch it once you get to where you wanted to go?
Guest Failed Mascot Posted December 16, 2004 Report Posted December 16, 2004 I'm this close to making a post about Beastiality Porn.
Dr. Tom Posted December 17, 2004 Report Posted December 17, 2004 I'm certainly not any kind of PETA vegetarian or anything, but I do advocate animal rights as being equal to human rights Rubbish. Animals have no rights, nor should they. Having rights means you can enter into the social contract, which animals clearly cannot do. This, of course, does not mean I believe animals should be mistreated. We are responsible for treating them humanely. But to say that they have, or should have, any rights is ridiculous. Bunny hugger.
Spicy McHaggis Posted December 17, 2004 Report Posted December 17, 2004 I think it's great YPOV stuck with this thread as long as he did. I probably would've ripped certain posters a new one.
Slayer Posted December 17, 2004 Report Posted December 17, 2004 Writing extended "Shame on you" posts isn't going to change anyone or anything
Guest Vitamin X Posted December 17, 2004 Report Posted December 17, 2004 I'm certainly not any kind of PETA vegetarian or anything, but I do advocate animal rights as being equal to human rights Rubbish. Animals have no rights, nor should they. Having rights means you can enter into the social contract, which animals clearly cannot do. This, of course, does not mean I believe animals should be mistreated. We are responsible for treating them humanely. But to say that they have, or should have, any rights is ridiculous. Bunny hugger. I wasn't referring to animal rights as in a legal sense, but in the more commonly accepted view of being treated humanely. But I still think it's silly for humans to think of themselves as so much better when we still possess many of the same qualities that many animals do, and vice versa. Again, the clear definition in that line lies in our use of technology, which in itself is unnatural, but the means by which we create it (as discussed above in this thread) aren't. I still don't believe that makes us an infinitely superior species, though. Like I said, should we treat other members of the human race unequally if they don't measure up to our standards of technology, culture, and civilization? Certain tribal cultures in the South Pacific and Africa have societies that are on par with certain other species on this planet in terms of technology and resourcefulness, as well as social structure and communication. So do we treat them like they're beneath us (us meaning the proud, advanced, and all around superior human race America) or should they be afforded at leat humane treatment and equal right, if they do indeed possess the capability to handle such a thing? My point of view is a little out there, so I don't expect most people to understand but the ones that do could probably make this an interesting discussion.
Guest Failed Mascot Posted December 17, 2004 Report Posted December 17, 2004 Everytime I open this thread the song "Horse With No Name" by America gets stuck in my head. It also makes me think of the movie "The Man Without a Face" starring Mel Gibson.
Guest SP-1 Posted December 19, 2004 Report Posted December 19, 2004 Humans wouldn't survive because our society has wussed us out.
Guest Vitamin X Posted December 19, 2004 Report Posted December 19, 2004 ^^ Precisely. In a way, our technological advances have devolved us as well as established us on top of the food chain.
Guest SP-1 Posted December 19, 2004 Report Posted December 19, 2004 I agree. Jungle/Tribal cultures are a much richer and stronger kind of humanity than anything in America or the "Civilized" world.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now