Rick Horton Posted February 6, 2013 Posted February 6, 2013 This is a vlog on the topic and I welcome discussion if you have anything to add to it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvMszDgFgzg
MrCapitalism Posted February 6, 2013 Posted February 6, 2013 I imagine that dog's don't taste very good. That's like.... 3rd world "you're gonna die if you don't get some animal protein" cuisine.. (didn't watch video, at work)
DoubtingThomas Posted February 6, 2013 Posted February 6, 2013 Dogs evolved (naturally and otherwise) along side human beings in a diffirent manner than pigs, which were simply bred as a food source. There are also plenty of eastern cultures that think nothing of eating dog as well as pork. The reason most western societies don't is because they've got a long-standing relationship with dogs as companions, or at least tools, rather than meals.
Magenta Posted February 6, 2013 Posted February 6, 2013 That's like.... 3rd world "you're gonna die if you don't get some animal protein" cuisine.. Side note: "Third World" has to do with alliances during the Cold War, not economic status. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World
Rick Horton Posted February 6, 2013 Author Posted February 6, 2013 I imagine dog probably tastes pretty good. Depending on how you feed it, it "might taste pretty good". Probably like pork.
Rick Horton Posted February 7, 2013 Author Posted February 7, 2013 Just incase anybody is confused, and thinks this video is a simple reflection of the name of the video I want to let you know that the idea in the video is about moral hierarchies, not animals.
Ruppert9 Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 This is a vlog on the topic and I welcome discussion if you have anything to add to it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvMszDgFgzg Not sure I like the use of 'We' in this video. Seems very statist terminology.
Rick Horton Posted February 8, 2013 Author Posted February 8, 2013 I think it's fair to use we and I don't see how that is statist.
MrCapitalism Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 Side note: "Third World" has to do with alliances during the Cold War, not economic status. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World Thanks! had no idea!
Ruppert9 Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 I think it's fair to use we and I don't see how that is statist. I think you said 'we went to war' or something along these lines - several times.
Rick Horton Posted February 8, 2013 Author Posted February 8, 2013 I think it's fair to use we and I don't see how that is statist. I think you said 'we went to war' or something along these lines - several times. Oh, good point.
Drew. Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 I would eat a dog. So long as it wasn't a pet. Pigs can be cute too. Just little at their little snouts sniffin' and snortin' at everything. They can smell all the world and they gonna eat it all with there wittle pot bellies and curious faces and pointy ears. I've been sad that I've lived in China for almost two years and I've never found an opportunity to try dog meat. I've had donkey though. Donkey is delicious.
Rick Horton Posted February 11, 2013 Author Posted February 11, 2013 The point is that morals aren't universally acted on, even if morals are generally agreed on. And morals are best acted on when prioritized to that hierarchy of self values. Moral activism outside of one's pyramid of importance is a misplaced use of action. It's probably pretty vanilla, but in a way it needs to be dealt with because it has underlying questions that stir up the idea of UPB. Not necessarily in a way that hurts UPB, but it is test worthy.
Recommended Posts