XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.animals.rights.promotion,   
   soc.culture.usa   
      
   On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 12:00:05 -0800, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:31:15 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:03:40 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 19:11:26 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:02:40 +0000, Derek  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>There's at least one more vegetarian I can think of who does a pretty   
   >>>>>good job in keeping that character group alive. He's Australian, you   
   >>>>>know. From a country that probably has one of the richest reserves of   
   >>>>>humour in the world.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    There's an Australian clown here who claims to have a PhD in math yet   
   can't   
   >>>>comprehend a simple aspect of life we discussed in class in grade school.   
   In the   
   >>>>grade school I went to, he probably would have been in special ed:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"I don't believe the distinction between "lives of positive value" and   
   >>>>"lives of negative value" means anything." - Rupert   
   >>>>   
   >>>>unless he was lying when he wrote that. An indication that he was is that   
   he   
   >>>>claimed to have been able to comprehend the distinction previous to his   
   claim   
   >>>>that he can not:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"I said to David Harrison that there exist some farmed animals such   
   >>>>that it would be a better outcome for them to live the life they do   
   >>>>rather than for them not to live at all and for no animals to live   
   >>>>in their place." - Rupert   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Do you think it's likely that he could comprehend at one point, and then   
   later   
   >>>>he unlearned? If so, how do you think he unlearned? If not, why do you   
   think he   
   >>>>started lying about it?   
   >>>   
   >>>No,   
   >>   
   >>   There's more to it than that Goob. Try again: Do you think it's likely   
   that   
   >>Rupert could comprehend at one point, and then later he unlearned? If so,   
   how do   
   >>you think he unlearned? If not, why do you think he started lying about it?   
   >   
   >There's nothing more to it than that   
      
       Do you think it's likely that Rupert could comprehend at one point Goob,   
   and   
   then later he unlearned? If so Goober, how do you think he unlearned? If not   
   why   
   do you think he started lying about it, Goo?   
      
   >>>you did not ever discuss in grade school how "getting to experience   
   >>>life" is a benefit.   
   >>   
   >>    Goober we discussed slavery in the US and the fact that some slaves were   
   >>content with their lives meaning they had positive value to them and that   
   other   
   >>slaves had lives which they considered to be good. We discussed the fact that   
   >>the value could and did change for them too Goo. We discussed that when they   
   >>became free they often couldn't find jobs so many agreed to stay on as slaves   
   >>until things changed over the years... We discussed more than that too Goo,   
   like   
   >>that some people would remain slaves even when life was of negative value to   
   >>them pesonally, in the hopes that things would be better for their children.   
   But   
   >>such details are necessarily beyond the mental ability of people who don't   
   see   
   >>how life could ever be a benefit ...LOL... to anything. It's also beyond the   
   >>ability of someone who doesn't think the distinction between lives of   
   positive   
   >>and negative value means anything, to appreciate how the difference between   
   >>lives of positive and negative value means anything, Goo. We were doing it by   
   >>the sixth grade Goober, but Dr. Rupert claims that he can't do it at all. He   
   >>claimed that he could in the past Goo, but has either unlearned or is still   
   able   
   >>to do it while lying that he can't. Either way seems very stupid from my pov,   
   >>Goo.   
   . . .   
   >You did *NOT* ever talk about slaves "benefiting" from "getting to experience   
   life.   
   . . .   
   >Every elementary school child in the US "discusses" that   
      
       Yet your brother Dr. Rupert doesn't believe the distinction means anything,   
   meaning if so he's stupider than anyone in my grade school what wasn't in   
   special ed, and probably the special ed kids could understand it too.   
      
   >, *Goo*.  But   
   >*NONE* ever talk about the philosophical implication of whether or not   
   >they "benefited" by "getting to experience life."   
      
       LOL!!! You sure are a stupid Goober to even let that possibility enter your   
   stupid little mind Goo, much less outstupid yourself by making such an absurdly   
   STUPID claim. LOL...to think that has never been discussed in an elementary   
   school is hilarious Goob, especially since we discussed it in some detail. Just   
   because you eliminationists can't think about it doesn't mean that most people   
   can't you idiot, and in fact from my experience most people CAN, Goo.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)