Erikmen
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 3, 2014
- Messages
- 20,707
Last edited:
-
P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat
Veganism/vegetarianism and "ethical" lifestyle choices
- Thread starter swilow
- Start date
turkalurk
Bluelighter
yes, basically I said its a beautiful thing until people start acting smug about it and try to push it on people by making it a moral high horse. I said that instead of trying to persuade people to only eat vegetables that it would be more effective to develop technology that would eliminate the need to kill our food. That we could eventually grow meat in labs or find some other alternative. I also related my stance(influenced by Taoism) that one ought to focus on how they themselves ought to live and let the world work itself out. Its my nature to empathize, but not to the point to where I feel my life is too contrived.
I embrace the suffering and unfairness of the world, because it will lead to progress. I don't need to be one that cuts through the current to tame the world. I would rather ride the waves and admire the whole scene in all its beauty. Everything has its place, and we can only live the role we were born to live. There is no changing your fate. If you changed something about your life, its because you are who you are which is only because the world made you that way in merely being what it is. I love the role we play in this world, and I have faith that no matter what we do, we were meant to do it, and it will be beautiful to me no matter what happens.
We could create a robot civilization that destroyed humanity but spread itself and a new form of life across the galaxy. I'd proud to be a part of it. Whatever the future holds, I can only imagined being awed by it and to be grateful to have such a place in this vast existence in which I can survey things with such admiration for everything the world is and such faith in its greatness that being a part of it fills me with appreciation.
The human ability to rationalise is truly amazing.
ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
What turk said was well articulated and I agree with him 100%...
Everything and everyone has a function.
His is no more or less important than yours or mine...
...
Having said that:
You acted worse than any so called smug person in this thread. Own it. It's not the end of the world. It was your place to do so. It served a small function, for you to insult people, whatever that function (or functions) happen/s to be...
If everything has it's place, then surely you must understand that trying to persuade people to be vegetarian also has it's place.
Perhaps it is your place, or somebody else's, to react to the vegetarian movement and create a more viable solution.
But we still have our place, as you have yours, don't we?
I really liked what Ninae quoted, from you.
You have somewhat of a more balanced perspective than the average militant vegetarian.
But, it needs a bit of reworking here and there. Don't let shit get to you. Don't insult people.
You could argue that it is your place to insult people. But, I think it was.
If you disagree with something, don't allow it to make you less of a person.
Stop the conflict with willow, already.
You're better than that.
Everything and everyone has a function.
His is no more or less important than yours or mine...
...
Having said that:
turk said:
You acted worse than any so called smug person in this thread. Own it. It's not the end of the world. It was your place to do so. It served a small function, for you to insult people, whatever that function (or functions) happen/s to be...
If everything has it's place, then surely you must understand that trying to persuade people to be vegetarian also has it's place.
Perhaps it is your place, or somebody else's, to react to the vegetarian movement and create a more viable solution.
But we still have our place, as you have yours, don't we?
I really liked what Ninae quoted, from you.
You have somewhat of a more balanced perspective than the average militant vegetarian.
But, it needs a bit of reworking here and there. Don't let shit get to you. Don't insult people.
You could argue that it is your place to insult people. But, I think it was.
If you disagree with something, don't allow it to make you less of a person.
Stop the conflict with willow, already.
You're better than that.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
My question to that would be from where does this fate/destiny/role emanate? Fate implies structure and design. To be honest, life on earth doesn't not really seemed planned and purposeful. It seems whimsical, arbitrary, chaotic. I can't really see any signs of fate or defined 'role' in my own life, so I wonder if such is another faithe based belief. I wonder if such a view is positive. Does believing in fate or destiny lead us to learned helplessness? I could see that happening...
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
I think you make your own fate. That could be an illusion but its convincing enough for me. I think that being alive at all, you have already met the extent of your fate. I'm not exactly sure how this connects to the topic at hand, unless you are talking about animals "role" as food for humans...?
ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
It is part of your function to not see that you have one.
drug_mentor
Bluelight Crew
Forgive me if I am repeating questions that have already been asked or discussed, I did not read all the way through this thread (or anywhere close).
I am not a vegetarian or a vegan, never have been, and the odds of me becoming one are quite slim. Despite this, I am fully prepared to acknowledge that factory farming is unethical, and as a meat eater who sources his meat from the supermarket, there is no question that I am contributing to this problem.
I am curious if many people who identify as vegetarian or vegan would have a problem with eating the flesh of an animal that was killed humanely, like one that was hunted and killed quickly with a clean shot? If it makes anyone feel better, this could be a deer or a kangaroo that was local to an area where deer/kangaroo populations were above what the environment could sustain, and it would almost certainly have died a more painful death due to starvation, had it not been culled.
Mainly, I want to know whether peoples objection to consumption of animal flesh derives from an objection to factory farming or meat eating in general? Despite my hypocrisy, I can largely sympathise with the former position, but I have trouble understanding the latter.
Willow11, in your OP you link to the 'deep ecology' philosophy and allude to the fact it has influenced your current diet. I did not have time to read extensively about deep ecology tonight, but skimming over the link you provided it suggests that even plants are believed to have interests and, generally, beings with interests are regarded to have rights.
If even plants have interests (and therefore rights), then is it merely a matter of stringency of rights that makes it alright to violate a plants right to life, but not a cows? If not, I can't see where humans are supposed to get their sustenance from, because consuming any being one had to kill would be impermissible. If it is merely a matter of stringency, then couldn't it be argued that the nature of human experience is likely to cause humans to notice and relate to the interests of other mammals, and the idea that mammals have greater interests than plants could very plausibly be derived from our mammalian bias? If that is the case, it could be argued that consuming the flesh of some mammals may not be more unethical than consuming plant matter.
Furthermore, if plants have interests, and by extension some minimum basic rights, but these rights are not stringent enough to prevent their consumption by humans. Is it really unfair to suppose that some animals rights are not stringent enough to warrant humans abstaining from consuming their flesh?
A plant might have less interests than a cow, but it also feeds substantially less people. Surely some sort of concept that would take different beings levels of self-interest and use this to assign each being rights of varying stringency would have to acknowledge that the amount of interests or preferences that are satisfied in ending that beings life for consumption would have to be a factor in whether it is morally permissible to do so.
I am not a vegetarian or a vegan, never have been, and the odds of me becoming one are quite slim. Despite this, I am fully prepared to acknowledge that factory farming is unethical, and as a meat eater who sources his meat from the supermarket, there is no question that I am contributing to this problem.
I am curious if many people who identify as vegetarian or vegan would have a problem with eating the flesh of an animal that was killed humanely, like one that was hunted and killed quickly with a clean shot? If it makes anyone feel better, this could be a deer or a kangaroo that was local to an area where deer/kangaroo populations were above what the environment could sustain, and it would almost certainly have died a more painful death due to starvation, had it not been culled.
Mainly, I want to know whether peoples objection to consumption of animal flesh derives from an objection to factory farming or meat eating in general? Despite my hypocrisy, I can largely sympathise with the former position, but I have trouble understanding the latter.
Willow11, in your OP you link to the 'deep ecology' philosophy and allude to the fact it has influenced your current diet. I did not have time to read extensively about deep ecology tonight, but skimming over the link you provided it suggests that even plants are believed to have interests and, generally, beings with interests are regarded to have rights.
If even plants have interests (and therefore rights), then is it merely a matter of stringency of rights that makes it alright to violate a plants right to life, but not a cows? If not, I can't see where humans are supposed to get their sustenance from, because consuming any being one had to kill would be impermissible. If it is merely a matter of stringency, then couldn't it be argued that the nature of human experience is likely to cause humans to notice and relate to the interests of other mammals, and the idea that mammals have greater interests than plants could very plausibly be derived from our mammalian bias? If that is the case, it could be argued that consuming the flesh of some mammals may not be more unethical than consuming plant matter.
Furthermore, if plants have interests, and by extension some minimum basic rights, but these rights are not stringent enough to prevent their consumption by humans. Is it really unfair to suppose that some animals rights are not stringent enough to warrant humans abstaining from consuming their flesh?
A plant might have less interests than a cow, but it also feeds substantially less people. Surely some sort of concept that would take different beings levels of self-interest and use this to assign each being rights of varying stringency would have to acknowledge that the amount of interests or preferences that are satisfied in ending that beings life for consumption would have to be a factor in whether it is morally permissible to do so.
Last edited:
murphythecat
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 812
fate and destiny are just words without much logic behind. like a lot of words in our language, they create and invent others realities that has nothing to do with the one we really live in.
My question to that would be from where does this fate/destiny/role emanate? Fate implies structure and design. To be honest, life on earth doesn't not really seemed planned and purposeful. It seems whimsical, arbitrary, chaotic. I can't really see any signs of fate or defined 'role' in my own life, so I wonder if such is another faithe based belief. I wonder if such a view is positive. Does believing in fate or destiny lead us to learned helplessness? I could see that happening...
I'm not exactly sure how this connects to the topic at hand, unless you are talking about animals "role" as food for humans...?
ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
I disagree. There is a lot of logic supporting the idea of fate/destiny. I couldn't be bothered having another long pointless discussion on P&S, so you're just going to have to take my word for it. So, I'll just say this: in the absence of free will, there is only destiny; you might be loading the word so that it means something else... Then again, maybe you believe in free will... in which case, like I said, I couldn't be bothered having a discussion. Free will is illogical... As for how all this pertains to the topic at hand, I think it's rather obvious. Turk said it perfectly, in the first place. There are people who are destined to eat meat, regardless of whether or not we're starting to head away from it as a species. They shouldn't be made to feel bad for doing so, if nothing is gained. Similarly (and I'm not equating anything) murderers should understand that they are victims of fate. Any one of us could be a murderer. We pat ourselves on the back for being delivered (seemingly randomly) to the so-called ethical high-ground that we preach from, but we could have - quite as easily - been delivered to the other side... And, we demonize those who've had less fortunate circumstances. We say they're bad people. But they have a function. Murder has a function. They're not bad, they're essential. No more or less essential than any of us, really. I feel sorry for victims of fate. To return to the context of the vegetarian discussion, I feel sorry for those who acknowledge that the meat industry is wrong but do not act on it. And, I wonder: what is the point of preaching from our ethical high-ground when we're only causing pain? There have been quite a lot of people object to "smugness" on this thread. But, that isn't the right word. After thinking about it for some time, I think we're - inadvertently - "rubbing their faces in it". They're not going to change, we're just judging them for who they are and - by implication - congratulating ourselves. There is a function to this - there is a function to promoting vegetarianism - but, I don't want to be part of it anymore. I don't want to be an activist. There is nothing wrong with leaving the world, as it is. Change will exist without me. I've spent enough time, over the past couple of months, beating my head against a wall (only to mock the wall for remaining upright). In the end, I don't think this thread has accomplished anything. Despite how much we attempt to justify our attempts to enact change (if, indeed, that's what they were), we aren't enacting change. The only thing we're doing is upsetting people. And, upset people are insulting sometimes. Upset people get worked up. So, what do we do? We insult them back. We discredit them. We work them up even more. Then we act like they're being even crazier. This machine - Bluelight - is broken. People cannot hear what they don't want to (read: are destined not to) hear. This thread has helped me realize the futility of threads/discussions like this. You can't convince a shark not to attack dolphins. Some people are sharks. And, there's nothing wrong with that. I like sharks.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
Okay. I think its pointless to make a definite statement and then refuse to discuss it. You may as well use a blog. I wish you did want to discuss this though, but your call brother 
I don't think people who eat meat are bad people. That would be a horrible underestimation of billions of people I won't ever know. I think they might be mistaken in the CHOICE they have made, but it very well could be me that's mistaken. I only wanted to hear other peoples opinions to check whether I might be wrong or not. Results have been inconclusive.
That's fine. You don't have to be. But you don't have to apologise for stating your values. People must realise that they are responsible for both their actions and reactions. The intent behind this thread was never to cause upset. Anyone who has been upset by it; that's a pity but it's also their choice. I don't really want to censor my views for fear of offending "victims of fate". I don't believe there is such a thing, but we're straying into grounds that you don't want to hear about.
For you, maybe. I've gained something from it; further clarity and solidity to my motivations, and understanding of people who don't share my values. So I've gained some deeper knowledge that was previously inaccessible to me. YMMV.
It would seem that your attitudes have changed a bit over the last few months. You mention something quite beautiful, that you don't want to upset people by proving them wrong. That's a lovely compassionate idea, and I absolutely understand why you feel that. Do you think this topic helped make you aware of that idea? You may actually have gained something from this conversation too
IME, when people have a less then enjoyable experience on Bluelight, they externalise that rather then deciding to be part of the solution. IMO making posts where you kill discussion immediately is not beneficial. This place isn't perfect, but it's a construct of the users, not the binary code behind it. We make this place what it is.
I think you underestimate the ability of people to take on others views and overstate the futility of discussion. As I said, your views seem to have changed a bit as you empathise with your 'opposition'. Believing you are incapable of change because of destiny or fate just leads to weakness and atrophy. Its scary to me that there is nothing to guide me, nothing to save me, nothing to come and help me, no purpose. That is something I consider objective, or at least I see nothing in the universe to make me think otherwise. I make my purpose, I have the tools to help and save me, I trust my instinct to guide me and protect me, I use my mind where my instincts cannot go...
It would be cool if some of you guys and girls could weigh in in our suggestions thread.
Foreverafter said:
I don't think people who eat meat are bad people. That would be a horrible underestimation of billions of people I won't ever know. I think they might be mistaken in the CHOICE they have made, but it very well could be me that's mistaken. I only wanted to hear other peoples opinions to check whether I might be wrong or not. Results have been inconclusive.
That's fine. You don't have to be. But you don't have to apologise for stating your values. People must realise that they are responsible for both their actions and reactions. The intent behind this thread was never to cause upset. Anyone who has been upset by it; that's a pity but it's also their choice. I don't really want to censor my views for fear of offending "victims of fate". I don't believe there is such a thing, but we're straying into grounds that you don't want to hear about.
For you, maybe. I've gained something from it; further clarity and solidity to my motivations, and understanding of people who don't share my values. So I've gained some deeper knowledge that was previously inaccessible to me. YMMV.
It would seem that your attitudes have changed a bit over the last few months. You mention something quite beautiful, that you don't want to upset people by proving them wrong. That's a lovely compassionate idea, and I absolutely understand why you feel that. Do you think this topic helped make you aware of that idea? You may actually have gained something from this conversation too
IME, when people have a less then enjoyable experience on Bluelight, they externalise that rather then deciding to be part of the solution. IMO making posts where you kill discussion immediately is not beneficial. This place isn't perfect, but it's a construct of the users, not the binary code behind it. We make this place what it is.
I think you underestimate the ability of people to take on others views and overstate the futility of discussion. As I said, your views seem to have changed a bit as you empathise with your 'opposition'. Believing you are incapable of change because of destiny or fate just leads to weakness and atrophy. Its scary to me that there is nothing to guide me, nothing to save me, nothing to come and help me, no purpose. That is something I consider objective, or at least I see nothing in the universe to make me think otherwise. I make my purpose, I have the tools to help and save me, I trust my instinct to guide me and protect me, I use my mind where my instincts cannot go...
***
It would be cool if some of you guys and girls could weigh in in our suggestions thread.
Last edited:
ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
I never said I was incapable of change and, yes, this discussion has helped me in a number of ways.
I - now - realize that I don't, for now, anyway, want to have discussions on the internet.
Even the futility of a discussion is functional.
Also, after beating my head against a wall for so long I realize that I have to change strategies.
This - what I've observed, largely, in P & S - is no way to discuss anything.
What I meant by this thread accomplishing nothing, you confirmed by saying what you think it accomplished.
A lot of discussions, particularly those - it seems - that are anonymous and turn-based, only serve to re-enforce the opinions of those involved.
That's what you said, more or less. But, having expressed yourself at such length you've only served to justify your position on the matter.
If it is your intention to persuade people not to consume meat, as you've stated repeatedly throughout this thread, that isn't what you're achieving (here, anyway).
That shouldn't come across as a criticism: I don't think it's possible to achieve it on the internet, hence the (relative) futility of this discussion.
Similarly, when I say that Bluelight is a broken machine, that shouldn't come across as a criticism of the website and how it is being run. I think discussion forums, in general, lend themselves towards bickering and - although they should be the perfect place for discussion - they end up just being playgrounds for pissing contests and confusion... We've been playing a bullshit card, that I see being played all over this website. We tell people we're better than them and that they should do what we're doing, then - when they react negatively - we turn around and say that we didn't break any rules. It's atypical passive-aggressive shit, IMO, and I feel rather ashamed to have contributed to it to the extent that I have. People should do whatever they're doing.
I never said you thought people who eat meat are bad people. I said society labels murderers, and such, bad people.
I don't think there are any bad people. I don't think eating meat is wrong, either.
When I was away from BL, I went to stay on a meat farm that some friends own.
Haven't been there since I was a kid.
I drove out into the middle of a field to feed a bunch of sheep.
They seemed happy enough. I saw a newborn.
The sheep flocked after the ute we were in.
I'm not sure where these sheep would be if we all stopped eating meat.
What would happen to them. Is it better for them not to be alive?
I'm not convinced by the entire argument, any more.
So, I no longer think it is wrong to contribute to the meat industry.
I - personally - don't feel okay about doing it, but I wish I did.
My parents eat meat.
I don't think what they're doing is wrong.
I have no inclination, whatsoever, to convince them otherwise.
It's more complicated than that, like you say, in that we shouldn't feel like we have to hide.
People who drive electric cars get the same reaction that vegetarians do.
But, that's just something we're going to have to deal with.
People who give a lot of money to charity sometimes prefer to keep it secret.
I wish I could keep my vegan tendencies, and the reasons behind them, secret. But, I can't.
That doesn't mean I should engage in a 40 page discussion about it and pretend like I don't understand why it pisses people off.
Maybe there is a way to enact change.
Maybe it is possible to convince people to become vegans.
But, this isn't it. This is doing the opposite.
We dig in our heels, and so do they.
What's the point?
I - now - realize that I don't, for now, anyway, want to have discussions on the internet.
Even the futility of a discussion is functional.
Also, after beating my head against a wall for so long I realize that I have to change strategies.
This - what I've observed, largely, in P & S - is no way to discuss anything.
What I meant by this thread accomplishing nothing, you confirmed by saying what you think it accomplished.
A lot of discussions, particularly those - it seems - that are anonymous and turn-based, only serve to re-enforce the opinions of those involved.
That's what you said, more or less. But, having expressed yourself at such length you've only served to justify your position on the matter.
If it is your intention to persuade people not to consume meat, as you've stated repeatedly throughout this thread, that isn't what you're achieving (here, anyway).
That shouldn't come across as a criticism: I don't think it's possible to achieve it on the internet, hence the (relative) futility of this discussion.
Similarly, when I say that Bluelight is a broken machine, that shouldn't come across as a criticism of the website and how it is being run. I think discussion forums, in general, lend themselves towards bickering and - although they should be the perfect place for discussion - they end up just being playgrounds for pissing contests and confusion... We've been playing a bullshit card, that I see being played all over this website. We tell people we're better than them and that they should do what we're doing, then - when they react negatively - we turn around and say that we didn't break any rules. It's atypical passive-aggressive shit, IMO, and I feel rather ashamed to have contributed to it to the extent that I have. People should do whatever they're doing.
I never said you thought people who eat meat are bad people. I said society labels murderers, and such, bad people.
I don't think there are any bad people. I don't think eating meat is wrong, either.
When I was away from BL, I went to stay on a meat farm that some friends own.
Haven't been there since I was a kid.
I drove out into the middle of a field to feed a bunch of sheep.
They seemed happy enough. I saw a newborn.
The sheep flocked after the ute we were in.
I'm not sure where these sheep would be if we all stopped eating meat.
What would happen to them. Is it better for them not to be alive?
I'm not convinced by the entire argument, any more.
So, I no longer think it is wrong to contribute to the meat industry.
I - personally - don't feel okay about doing it, but I wish I did.
My parents eat meat.
I don't think what they're doing is wrong.
I have no inclination, whatsoever, to convince them otherwise.
It's more complicated than that, like you say, in that we shouldn't feel like we have to hide.
People who drive electric cars get the same reaction that vegetarians do.
But, that's just something we're going to have to deal with.
People who give a lot of money to charity sometimes prefer to keep it secret.
I wish I could keep my vegan tendencies, and the reasons behind them, secret. But, I can't.
That doesn't mean I should engage in a 40 page discussion about it and pretend like I don't understand why it pisses people off.
Maybe there is a way to enact change.
Maybe it is possible to convince people to become vegans.
But, this isn't it. This is doing the opposite.
We dig in our heels, and so do they.
What's the point?
swilow
Bluelight Crew
That's a good post dude
I've felt frustrated by this forum too. I found this thread to be almost confronting; I'm not used to arguing with a lot of people at once. But I've used it to benefit myself, so I perhaps have some reason to feel satisfied.
Not precisely what I meant, though that too proves your point somewhat. What I meant is that by getting others to share their views on non-meat diets, I gained insight into my own motivations by trying to view it from other's perspective. What person isn't something of a mystery to themself? And in doing that, I learned somethinI haven't really reinforced my views because some aspects of the discussion have caused me to actively question it. That's what I desired TBH, to "acquire knowledge".
I certainly am not pretending to be right about anything. How can what's right for me automatically be the same for everyone?
But that was not my intention at all, and I certainly never said that. I only wanted to see what other people thought of this lifestyle. It is hard, however, when discussing an active belief you hold, to not appear to be promoting it. I've tried to avoid that, but if that's what you see as the point of this thread, I've evidently missed the mark.
If you truly believe in destiny and compulsion, then you would know that its not YOU upsetting them; its their role to be upset. I see it slightly differently; if people have thought that I claimed to be better then them, that's their problem. I've never said that, and I don't think it. I am not responsible for peoples reactions; they are. Of course, I won't actively try to upset somebody, but if being honest does that, too bad.
This isn't new though. Philosophy and ethics have seen people killed.
If they didn't exist, literally nothing would happen to them; there would be no them. If they are born, they will suffer a brief life of loss and no autonomy and a frightening death. The choice seems simple to me as a human.
Communication is important. I hope to think that most people in this thread have also questioned their views, examined them and got to know them better. It happened to me. I see no reason to think that no-one else has benefited from this. This was never meant to convert people. If that's the perception, then yeah, this threads been a fucking blowout. But I don't see it like that. I saw it as disparate people sharing their idea's and mutually benefiting from it.
I'm sure that I've done all the things you are saying, but I've never intended to. I don't care anymore whether I am right or wrong, I am me, you are you, we will always be seperate but there are ways to decrease the magnitude of that speration. Communication is one of the more effective ways.
With that said, I don't think this particular thread will achieve much more. There are countless other discussions to be had though. I think it might actually be detracting from the overall forum though. I feel like I've benefited from this but no-one else has. It seems selfish to let it continue.
I've felt frustrated by this forum too. I found this thread to be almost confronting; I'm not used to arguing with a lot of people at once. But I've used it to benefit myself, so I perhaps have some reason to feel satisfied.
Not precisely what I meant, though that too proves your point somewhat. What I meant is that by getting others to share their views on non-meat diets, I gained insight into my own motivations by trying to view it from other's perspective. What person isn't something of a mystery to themself? And in doing that, I learned somethinI haven't really reinforced my views because some aspects of the discussion have caused me to actively question it. That's what I desired TBH, to "acquire knowledge".
I certainly am not pretending to be right about anything. How can what's right for me automatically be the same for everyone?
But that was not my intention at all, and I certainly never said that. I only wanted to see what other people thought of this lifestyle. It is hard, however, when discussing an active belief you hold, to not appear to be promoting it. I've tried to avoid that, but if that's what you see as the point of this thread, I've evidently missed the mark.
If you truly believe in destiny and compulsion, then you would know that its not YOU upsetting them; its their role to be upset. I see it slightly differently; if people have thought that I claimed to be better then them, that's their problem. I've never said that, and I don't think it. I am not responsible for peoples reactions; they are. Of course, I won't actively try to upset somebody, but if being honest does that, too bad.
This isn't new though. Philosophy and ethics have seen people killed.
If they didn't exist, literally nothing would happen to them; there would be no them. If they are born, they will suffer a brief life of loss and no autonomy and a frightening death. The choice seems simple to me as a human.
Communication is important. I hope to think that most people in this thread have also questioned their views, examined them and got to know them better. It happened to me. I see no reason to think that no-one else has benefited from this. This was never meant to convert people. If that's the perception, then yeah, this threads been a fucking blowout. But I don't see it like that. I saw it as disparate people sharing their idea's and mutually benefiting from it.
I'm sure that I've done all the things you are saying, but I've never intended to. I don't care anymore whether I am right or wrong, I am me, you are you, we will always be seperate but there are ways to decrease the magnitude of that speration. Communication is one of the more effective ways.
With that said, I don't think this particular thread will achieve much more. There are countless other discussions to be had though. I think it might actually be detracting from the overall forum though. I feel like I've benefited from this but no-one else has. It seems selfish to let it continue.
ForEverAfter
Ex-Bluelighter
Yes, you did. (I couldn't be bothered proving it.)
And it is my role, in turn, to make a "conscious" decision to separate myself from the situation.
It is my role to upset them; it is their role to be upset: either way, I'm not interested.
Maybe it's the role of futile childish ego-driven adult discussions, in general, to chip away at people until they eventually look down and see themselves exposed at the core for the absurd individuals they are. And, perhaps, the function of "people being upset" is (in part) to indicate that the people who are upsetting them should think about changing strategies. To just wash your hands of the whole situation is bullshit; just as it is bullshit for your side to accept all the "blame": we pass it off to them and they pass it off to us and "blame" essentially ceases to exist.
Its not you that's raping them; it's their role to be raped.
Et cetera.
But it is implied, by this whole situation. That's why I feel uncomfortable talking about it to my family. People will inevitably ask you why you don't eat meat and - if you're brutally honest with them - it reads as if you're better than them. Although you don't accept this, it's there. It's not really your choice: if you are an activist; if you take a stance against something that is widespread in society that you think is wrong, people won't react very well to it. And we can say, "fuck it, we're doing the right thing," but - maybe - we're not. Maybe the more we talk about it, we're just upsetting people.
I think you are - at least to some extent - as responsible as they are.
It's about how you say it, as well as whether or not what you're saying is right.
Here, it's clear that the approach we're taking isn't working.
Yet we continue, with the same unfaltering tenacity.
This is a broken machine.
We're running a program, but we aren't adapting it according to the results.
We're upsetting people and they're telling us why; and all we can't hear it.
Because the program is righteous.
If you truly didn't think you were responsible for people's reactions you wouldn't be so polite, and you wouldn't have taken the job of a moderator. Surely, you have to acknowledge that there are right and wrong ways to say the same thing. (Again, I couldn't be bothered rewinding through this mess of a discussion and proving that we both accept this by quoting some of our interactions with turk.) If you can say something to somebody in the wrong way, then - in that situation - wouldn't you agree that you're at least somewhat responsible for their reaction to it? There's a lot of people on this forum that have been beaten into submission to the forum's socially accepted level of etiquette and learnt how to push people's buttons through a veil of bullshit internet etiquette... I often don't like the way that people are treated on this board and, when I spend time here, I find myself taking part in it. I feel like I'm being swallowed into a virtual cult, where certain values have been predetermined for me, full of passive-aggressive troll hunting assholes who get their kicks from shaming people they think they can publicly outsmart by Googling shit and passing it off as intellect.
Of course it's your responsibility how people react to what you say: that's part of the foundation of civilized discussion.
There is no objective standard for communication. Nobody can say what is a right or wrong way to say something.
We need to listen to each other; and, I don't see that happening a lot around here (from either side).
What is the right way to say something to, any given person, can be determined by their reaction.
We're not gauging reactions, and - consequently - coming up with more effective ways to communicate; we're not really enacting change: we're just yelling at each other, like those idiots in parliament; and latching onto the things that we can use against each other. You can say that you don't want to contribute to change, but I know you do. And, if you do - if we do - we need to change. Because, like I said, this ain't working.
Intention is meaningless without free will... We need to be aware of what we're doing, if our trajectory is to change.
That's all I'm trying to do: facilitate change, rather than pretend to by repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome.
If I don't believe in free will, I don't believe in blame. So, there is no need to defend yourself. You're not on trial.
Whether or not you intended to is irrelevant.
You did it.
So did I.
We should recognize our faults and maintain that awareness, so that we can change (for good).
Last edited:
Xorkoth
Bluelight Crew
Nice last few posts... very thought-provoking.
Willow, I feel I've gained from this thread too, not entirely in the ways you probably intended. I have gained a greater understanding of some of the thought processes that go into people choosing veganism/vegetarianism, and even moreso than that, I have learned some things about the flow of discussion and the way people react to different ways of presenting opinions.
Willow, I feel I've gained from this thread too, not entirely in the ways you probably intended. I have gained a greater understanding of some of the thought processes that go into people choosing veganism/vegetarianism, and even moreso than that, I have learned some things about the flow of discussion and the way people react to different ways of presenting opinions.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
Regarding upsetting people while being polite; I was trying to induce a similar response back- that is what I wanted to get- some people chose to react different.
That's good to hear. I really had no intent for anyone but myself, so I'm glad to hear that you've gotten something from this.
I'm going to shut this thread because its become relatively pointless and repetitve. I think foreverafter raise's some good points that are worthy of discussion and I thank him for that, but they are outside the scope of this thread. Please PM me if anyone wants me to re-open it.
Peace
That's good to hear. I really had no intent for anyone but myself, so I'm glad to hear that you've gotten something from this.
I'm going to shut this thread because its become relatively pointless and repetitve. I think foreverafter raise's some good points that are worthy of discussion and I thank him for that, but they are outside the scope of this thread. Please PM me if anyone wants me to re-open it.
Peace
swilow
Bluelight Crew
Reopened at user's request. Play nice
turkalurk
Bluelighter
what can I say, I am a rational/reasonable person.
turkalurk
Bluelighter
My question to that would be from where does this fate/destiny/role emanate? Fate implies structure and design. To be honest, life on earth doesn't not really seemed planned and purposeful. It seems whimsical, arbitrary, chaotic. I can't really see any signs of fate or defined 'role' in my own life, so I wonder if such is another faithe based belief. I wonder if such a view is positive. Does believing in fate or destiny lead us to learned helplessness? I could see that happening...
I'm not exactly sure how this connects to the topic at hand, unless you are talking about animals "role" as food for humans...?
willow, you just don't seem to interpret my words the way I intend them to be, because your personal biases seem to intervere on a level that makes it hard for me to talk to you. Fate does not necessarily imply structure and design. Did I mention god? Is that what your problem is? You think I am bringing god into the discussion and you have some kind of chip on your shoulder about it? I believe I said that your fate is tied to the world simply being what it is. This world emanates from a potentiality being actualized. Existence/Being is my god. If you think you can be anything other than what the world made you to be, then you are foolishly blinded by your ego.
ebola?
Bluelight Crew
Over the course of this discussion, this problem has not been unique to willow in the least; misinterpretation (and indeed, interpretation) is a two way street, and you may want to examine those factors that are common among situations in which you're misinterpreted.
Regardless, I don't see how leading with this type of rhetoric facilitates meaningful exchange.
But anyway, you have an interesting point: what is the meaning of "fate" (and teleology in general), in the absence of a deity?
Intriguing: this sounds decidedly Hegelian at first glance.
ebola