Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Surprised you didn't get thehistorybore to second this time round!

    Probably a Nay. I abstained last time but I need to check my reasoning as I think there were certain provisions last time.
    Irrelevant as I am currently on my vacation from the house :P
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thehistorybore)
    Irrelevant as I am currently on my vacation from the house :P
    Fair point
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    It feels like a blast from the past. Won't lie, don't really care about animal rights, and I think I supported this sort of bill in the past? Not too sure.

    It's between an abstain and an aye.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    This is word perfect for that last time you tried, and I said nay last time so....
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Funny how people who support fox hunting also tend to call halal meat abhorrent because it's cruel to animals!

    A cruel, barbaric sport that teaches kids that humans are the superior beings and animal exist for humans pleasure and nothing else. Linked to the dark triad promoting narcissism, antisocial behaviour and dissociation disorders. NO
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Funny how people who support fox hunting also tend to call halal meat abhorrent because it's cruel to animals!

    A cruel, barbaric sport that teaches kids that humans are the superior beings and animal exist for humans pleasure and nothing else. Linked to the dark triad promoting narcissism, antisocial behaviour and dissociation disorders. NO
    Dayum. That was poetic :O
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    an easy aye
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    even blair regrets this absurd ban
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Funny how people who support fox hunting also tend to call halal meat abhorrent because it's cruel to animals!

    A cruel, barbaric sport that teaches kids that humans are the superior beings and animal exist for humans pleasure and nothing else. Linked to the dark triad promoting narcissism, antisocial behaviour and dissociation disorders. NO
    you genuinely believe we aren't?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    even blair regrets this absurd ban
    He's basically a Tory though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    He's basically a Tory though.
    even the mot hardline corbynite wouldn't think blair was socially conservative
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    you genuinely believe we aren't?
    I don't. As is well documented. The metric you decide to determine superiority will always be based on the belief that you are superior as a human and as such you cannot say objectively that you are a superior life form because you yourself are bias to finding you the winner.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    I don't. As is well documented. The metric you decide to determine superiority will always be based on the belief that you are superior as a human and as such you cannot say objectively that you are a superior life form because you yourself are bias to finding you the winner.
    well my metric is that organisms which qualify for personhood outrank those which dont. Biased because i am a person? perhaps.

    Doesn't prove it wrong though.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    I don't. As is well documented. The metric you decide to determine superiority will always be based on the belief that you are superior as a human and as such you cannot say objectively that you are a superior life form because you yourself are bias to finding you the winner.
    We're superior in intelligence, but there are so many animals that have us beat in raw speed, strength, patience, and pretty much any other metric.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    well my metric is that organisms which qualify for personhood outrank those which dont. Biased because i am a person? perhaps.

    Doesn't prove it wrong though.
    You are making the asertation so you have to prove it correct. The onus of proof is on you.
    Which organisms qualify for personhood? What lets an organism qualify?
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    We're superior in intelligence, but there are so many animals that have us beat in raw speed, strength, patience, and pretty much any other metric.
    Exactly. We choose intelligence because it's the one we win at. Although there are some other really intelligent animals out there.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    You are making the asertation so you have to prove it correct. The onus of proof is on you.
    Which organisms qualify for personhood? What lets an organism qualify?

    Exactly. We choose intelligence because it's the one we win at. Although there are some other really intelligent animals out there.
    its intuitively obvious but technical as **** to prove and i cba right now.

    also proof we would choose intelligence just because we would win? If you want everybody to prove their claims then i expect you'll have defined a possible world where that counterfactual obtains and is provably true based on that worlds relation to true propositions in this world.

    or we can keep proofs and philosophy out of the mhoc cuz its bare effort
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    its intuitively obvious but technical as **** to prove and i cba right now.

    also proof we would choose intelligence just because we would win? If you want everybody to prove their claims then i expect you'll have defined a possible world where that counterfactual obtains and is provably true based on that worlds relation to true propositions in this world.

    or we can keep proofs and philosophy out of the mhoc cuz its bare effort
    If it is obvious the proof should be simple.

    Because we are brought up being told that we are superior and thsi is a belief ingrained into society so we have confirmation bias. And I have no idea what you mean in that second part.

    Philosophy and logical deduction are part of politics.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy98)
    This is word perfect for that last time you tried, and I said nay last time so....
    No it isn't

    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    We're superior in intelligence, but there are so many animals that have us beat in raw speed, strength, patience, and pretty much any other metric.
    Give me a gun, combat knife, couple of Claymores (1 mine one sword please) and tell me what I'm killing for you, and a horse if you don't mind, beats walking.
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    So you're saying this bill is purely to keep fox numbers down, not to re-introduce a vicious activity which the upper class have enjoyed participating in in the past?
    I'm saying no such thing, and once again you are making classist assumptions
    (Original post by TitanCream)
    Of course not, but why make it legal to hunt them? I'm really struggling to see your justification. Animals kill animals? Yes, it's called a food chain you see, humans should be able to hunt foxes? You put 1 + 1 and found 4. Your logic is deeply flawed here.
    We come back round to the starting point again, you are to be killed (possibly), you get to choose how:1) run for your life and if I catch you (shouldn't be too hard to get away unless you're more out of shape than I am) I break your neck2) I shoot you, most places won't kill you very quickly3) stick your leg in a bear trap and see how long you last.The flaw in the logic you are creating is to baselessly reject the premise
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Lol, Jammy couldn't even be bothered to put the effort in to change to the correct year.Nay, fox hunting is cruel and unnatural and serves no purpose that could not be served by something else.
    It seems you forgot the exchange, surplus killing is not unique to humans, in fact foxes themselves have been observed surplus killing (and to a really rather extreme level), but not just foxes. Got any pets? If it's a cat or dog it would happily do the same, along with most bears, orcas, honey badgers, even some mites. To declare it should not be allowed because it is unatural is like saying homosexuality should be illegal because it's unatural, are you writing the bill to make homosexuality illegal again or do you want Hazzer1198 to do it for you and you just second it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)

    Give me a gun, combat knife, couple of Claymores (1 mine one sword please) and tell me what I'm killing for you, and a horse if you don't mind, beats walking.
    Notice I said raw [metric].
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Notice I said raw [metric].
    Okay, I guess a piece of obsidian and a long stick will have to do then.
    Raw metrics are far from the most useful of things, it boils things down to individual parts of a package rather than the overall. Which would you rather have, a car with all the best individual parts and a weak chassis, or a car with slightly worse parts but a chassis that will have no issues?
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 16, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.