(November 19, 2017 at 6:06 am)Aroura Wrote: 1. YOU brought up the human comparison, initially. There are no "objective" reasons for morality. Everything is subjective. What sort of Objective reason do you think might exist?
2. This isn't an argument. It doesn't even address point #2
3. I didn't bring up religion. You said "Every life form on this planet has a pourpouse, soo how can we be sure that some animals aren't ment just for our nourishment". I simply asked what you meant with the words and phrases you used about meant for our nourishment and has a purpose. How can things have a purpose and who gives them that purpose?
Seems you aren't used to having discussions. I'm not being rude, I'm just asking questions and trying to further the
1. I brought up human comparision in the way that if a tiger kills an antilope isn't more natural that a human killing a pig , it is the same reason , food . You comparing killing animals with killing other humans is just not related to the topic. I meant objective morality that comes from facts not feelings or independent of your feelings towards the topic. And I give you an example of a morality based on facts.
2. Now we are talking here about a man killing an animal for food , not mass killing for food , I'm saying that a man can raise a pig for example , witch won't be a suffering life and kill it without him suffering.
3. Almost everything plays a role in nature , maybe I missused the word pourpouse.
I tend to get deffensive sometimes.
