Page 16 of 20 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 199

Thread: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

  1. #151
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 07:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Despite the fact that I keep asking, you continue to fail to offer a morally relevant distinction between the two. The factor of widespread societal approval of the former is not an especially relevant one; if it was a traditional cultural practice to mutilate cats for sport, and that was adopted and practiced on a wide scale, that would not affect its ethical status.
    I don't have to address anything except what is relevant. Your attempt to bring together two completely separate issues is YOUR problem.

    And yes, widespread social approval is what is relevant here. Norms of the society that this kid was raised in indicate a distinct difference between a pet and livestock for food consumption. That has everything to do with the issue here. His detachment from those norms suggests a severe lack of empathy with his fellow man, even if it doesn't have an ethical bearing on whether the cat was worthy of his empathy or not.

    And before you start caterwauling about a fallacy you seem to be very confused about, let me remind you from Logic 101 that the exceptions to the argumentum ad populum fallacies are those points of discussion which innately rely on numbers or acceptance by popularity. For example, democracy, free markets, and social conventions.

    Now you may continue preening and adoring your own immense brain power but I, for one, am done with your posturing and pestering.
    Last edited by jallman; 06-16-09 at 07:11 PM.

  2. #152
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 12:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    By completely different I meant the discussion are too different to try and morph them together.

    A discussion about some nut who offs neighborhood pets is not easily blended with the ethics or lack thereof in regards to factory farms.

  3. #153
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-24-09 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    And yes, widespread social approval is what is relevant here. Norms of the society that this kid was raised in indicate a distinct difference between a pet and livestock for food consumption. That has everything to do with the issue here. His detachment from those norms suggests a severe lack of empathy with his fellow man, even if it doesn't have an ethical bearing on whether the cat was worthy of his empathy or not.

    And before you start caterwauling about a fallacy you seem to be very confused about, let me remind you from Logic 101 that the exceptions to the argumentum ad populum fallacies are those points of discussion which innately rely on numbers or acceptance by popularity. For example, democracy, free markets, and social conventions.
    And as I said, this has no bearing whatsoever on the morally relevant portion of the comparison, that being the nature of the animals' suffering. As an aside, free markets don't exist, and democracy is rather diluted. As to the substantive portion, you yourself seem rather confused about the nature of "social conventions" subject to logically fallacious popular acceptance. So I'll merely ask this: If cat mutilation were an accepted societal practice, would that provide moral justification for the act?

    Your claim is merely a fallacious one; you defend the morality of a certain societal practice merely because of its status as one, while you simultaneously condemn a random act of mutilation because it involved an individual dissenting from the norm. That is pure majoritarian fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
    By completely different I meant the discussion are too different to try and morph them together.

    A discussion about some nut who offs neighborhood pets is not easily blended with the ethics or lack thereof in regards to factory farms.
    Again, why? What morally relevant distinction between the two exists? The psychological state of the respective killers has already been ruled out, unless you have another argument or a rebuttal to advance.

  4. #154
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 07:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    And as I said, this has no bearing whatsoever on the morally relevant portion of the comparison, that being the nature of the animals' suffering.
    Irrelevant to this discussion entirely. The issue at hand is the emotional disturbance of this kid.

    As an aside, free markets don't exist, and democracy is rather diluted.
    Irrelevant.

    As to the substantive portion, you yourself seem rather confused about the nature of "social conventions" subject to logically fallacious popular acceptance. So I'll merely ask this: If cat mutilation were an accepted societal practice, would that provide moral justification for the act?
    It isn't. And that isn't even the relevant issue within this thread. The fact is, social norms for our culture indicate a distinct difference between livestock for food consumption and family pets. This kid had such a detachment from social norms that he exhibited depraved deviation which warrants examination. Any pursuit of the moral relativism of a cat's life value (or whatever nonsense you are attempting to inject into this discussion) is for another thread entirely.

    Your claim is merely a fallacious one; you defend the morality of a certain societal practice merely because of its status as one, while you simultaneously condemn a random act of mutilation because it involved an individual dissenting from the norm. That is pure majoritarian fallacy.
    No, it falls under the exception rule to argumentum ad populum. You are attempting some asinine reversal of that fallacy and you are only going to manage to confuse yourself because neither I, nor any other rational person, are going to buy into it.

    Again, why? What morally relevant distinction between the two exists?
    Social norms dictate that a pet is treated differently than a side of beef. Again, because social norms innately rely on popularity or numbers, the argumentum ad populum fallacy is excepted. But we aren't discussing whether a cat is worth more than a cow. We are discussing the deviant behavior of a disturbed young boy.

    The psychological state of the respective killers has already been ruled out, unless you have another argument or a rebuttal to advance.
    I am not rebutting your irrelevant derailment of the conversation.
    Last edited by jallman; 06-16-09 at 07:27 PM.

  5. #155
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    06-04-18 @ 07:26 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    We do need to remember the part about:

    "Weinman was taken into custody at a party and was being questioned at Miami-Dade police headquarters. Four of the confirmed cat killings were reported on the street where Weinman lived.

    His attorney, David W. Macey, said in an e-mail that Weinman is innocent of the charges.

    "Tyler welcomes his day in court, so that he will be completely vindicated," Macey said."


    The only time I become concerned is when people treat cruelty to an animal as more serious than cruelty to a human, particularly a child. I also don't really understand "improperly disposing of a dead animal" in general.

    There also could be a question of did he kill the animals or torture them? Killing an animal isn't cruelty to an animal. Some other charge could apply to killing an animal.

  6. #156
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-24-09 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Irrelevant to this discussion entirely. The issue at hand is the emotional disturbance of this kid.
    Not the portion that we've been focusing on thus far. Emotional states are irrelevant to the morality of most actions since they're effectively entirely detached from the consequences of most actions. One might be more skeptical of the emotional state of the hunter who kills for sport than the factory farm worker who kills animals less humanely for food, but the former inflicts less suffering on an animal than the latter does, despite the possibly more questionable emotional state of the former.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Irrelevant.
    I didn't claim otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    It isn't. And that isn't even the relevant issue within this thread. The fact is, social norms for our culture indicate a distinct difference between livestock for food consumption and family pets. This kid had such a detachment from social norms that he exhibited depraved deviation which warrants examination. Any pursuit of the moral relativism of a cat's life value (or whatever nonsense you are attempting to inject into this discussion) is for another thread entirely.
    You again continue to dodge the very simple question that I've asked. Don't be shy; it only requires a "Yes" or "No" answer. The reason for this is that you are personally aware that violent cat mutilation would be immoral even if it was a widely accepted societal practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No, it falls under the exception rule to argumentum ad populum. You are attempting some asinine reversal of that fallacy and you are only going to manage to confuse yourself because neither I, nor any other rational person, are going to buy into it.
    Considering your blatant rejection of empirical research in favor of crude preconceived ideological dogma, you're far from being a rational person.

    But aside from that, you remain wrong because actions are not morally justifiable on the grounds that they're generally prevalent societal behaviors. Would you be willing to extend your sphere of protection to slavery in areas where it was a heavily adopted societal fixture? Your claims quickly crumble into dust when their inconsistency is revealed, which is why you've been unwilling to examine the nature of their inconsistency.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Social norms dictate that a pet is treated differently than a side of beef. Again, because social norms innately rely on popularity or numbers, the argumentum ad populum fallacy is excepted. But we aren't discussing whether a cat is worth more than a cow. We are discussing the deviant behavior of a disturbed young boy.
    You again return to the same fallacious claim despite its identification as such. Until you stop dodging and derailing and respond to the aforementioned query in a straightforward and frank manner, both this and your awareness of the fallacious nature of such shall be wholly apparent.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I am not rebutting your irrelevant derailment of the conversation.
    You are not rebutting my response to the comment you made about emotional states because you're again aware of the inaccuracy of your claim, presumably.

  7. #157
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 07:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Not the portion that we've been focusing on thus far. Emotional states are irrelevant to the morality of most actions since they're effectively entirely detached from the consequences of most actions. One might be more skeptical of the emotional state of the hunter who kills for sport than the factory farm worker who kills animals less humanely for food, but the former inflicts less suffering on an animal than the latter does, despite the possibly more questionable emotional state of the former.



    I didn't claim otherwise.



    You again continue to dodge the very simple question that I've asked. Don't be shy; it only requires a "Yes" or "No" answer. The reason for this is that you are personally aware that violent cat mutilation would be immoral even if it was a widely accepted societal practice.



    Considering your blatant rejection of empirical research in favor of crude preconceived ideological dogma, you're far from being a rational person.

    But aside from that, you remain wrong because actions are not morally justifiable on the grounds that they're generally prevalent societal behaviors. Would you be willing to extend your sphere of protection to slavery in areas where it was a heavily adopted societal fixture? Your claims quickly crumble into dust when their inconsistency is revealed, which is why you've been unwilling to examine the nature of their inconsistency.



    You again return to the same fallacious claim despite its identification as such. Until you stop dodging and derailing and respond to the aforementioned query in a straightforward and frank manner, both this and your awareness of the fallacious nature of such shall be wholly apparent.



    You are not rebutting my response to the comment you made about emotional states because you're again aware of the inaccuracy of your claim, presumably.
    Uh...still not the topic. If you want to discuss the issue of this boy mutilating his neighborhood pets, that's fine. I am not going to derail the thread with some indulgence of the question of moral relativity of killing your neighbor's pet as opposed to killing a cow for food.

    And I have never rejected empirical evidence. I rejected another of your attempts to derail another thread with your pseudo intellectual posturing and what amounts to off topic bull****.

    Now scamper along and talk to someone who cares because I don't.

  8. #158
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-24-09 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Uh...still not the topic. If you want to discuss the issue of this boy mutilating his neighborhood pets, that's fine. I am not going to derail the thread with some indulgence of the question of moral relativity of killing your neighbor's pet as opposed to killing a cow for food.
    There's no derailment involved. There's a juxtaposition inserted in order to formulate a consistent ethical position.

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    And I have never rejected empirical evidence. I rejected another of your attempts to derail another thread with your pseudo intellectual posturing and what amounts to off topic bull****.
    Wrong. You dismissed empirical research presented as "opinion" and suggested that it was fraudulent in nature. When I challenged you to prove these assertions, you were unable to.

  9. #159
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 07:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    There's no derailment involved. There's a juxtaposition inserted in order to formulate a consistent ethical position.



    Wrong. You dismissed empirical research presented as "opinion" and suggested that it was fraudulent in nature. When I challenged you to prove these assertions, you were unable to.
    You confuse unable with unwilling to indulge the derailment. I wasn't interested in it then and I'm not interested in it now no matter how much you tug my pant leg to try to get my attention.

  10. #160
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-24-09 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: 18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    You confuse unable with unwilling to indulge the derailment. I wasn't interested in it then and I'm not interested in it now no matter how much you tug my pant leg to try to get my attention.
    "Tug your pant leg"? I do believe the voters of our state sent us a message about the Craig-esque, but a lack of interest would manifest itself through a lack of a response from this point forward. Unfortunately, you have an obsessive need to have the last word so as to conceal the reality of your inconsistency.

Page 16 of 20 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •