Click to expand
Rank #10416 on ContentLevel 218 Comments: Comedic Genius
OfflineSend mail to vikingontour Block vikingontour Invite vikingontour to be your friend flag avatar
|Last status update:|| |
|Date Signed Up:||1/30/2013|
|Funnyjunk Career Stats|
|Highest Content Rank:||#3134|
|Highest Comment Rank:||#2017|
|Content Thumbs:||1807 total, 2329 , 522|
|Comment Thumbs:||2119 total, 2586 , 467|
|Content Level Progress:|| 26% (26/100) |
Level 116 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 117 Content: Funny Junkie
|Comment Level Progress:|| 97% (97/100) |
Level 218 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 219 Comments: Comedic Genius
|Times Content Favorited:||39 times|
|Total Comments Made:||905|
|Favorite Tags:||Ninja (3) | Art (2) | cat (2) | Google (2) | kitty (2) | MLP (2) | Trixie is best p (2)|
- Views: 25646I regret nothing
546 88 Total: +458
- Views: 16340To me he will always be the...
310 20 Total: +290
- Views: 13668Good day
262 37 Total: +225
- Views: 11267How many
240 29 Total: +211
- Views: 7831How many?
167 13 Total: +154
- Views: 7346Oh God Why....
123 14 Total: +109
latest user's comments
|#71 - I´m just gonna go kill myself now. gg everyone!||17 hours ago on RAGE TIME! Baby for sale,...||+2|
|#102 - I guess everything can be made into something negative, but le… [+] (1 new reply)||05/26/2015 on You Rage, You Lose.||0|
|#7 - smashing||05/26/2015 on Aww fuck, I can't believe...||+1|
|#10 - What is 2 + 2 if its not 4?...... then its wrong!||05/26/2015 on Punsss||0|
|#97 - I just think that we like to eat meat should not be compared t… [+] (4 new replies)||05/26/2015 on You Rage, You Lose.||0|
|#83 - one is eating an animal that is part of a food chain. the… [+] (28 new replies)||05/26/2015 on You Rage, You Lose.||+1|
#94 - auryn (05/26/2015) [-]
Humans don't need to eat meat for survival, they choose to do purely for the sake of their own enjoyment.
The other is hurting people? Oh, I'm sorry it must be very upsetting getting confronted with the fact that you expect others to suffer and die for nothing else but your own sense gratification.
How very selfish of the people who try to raise some awareness on this matter, I apologize on their behalf.
Those damn evil bastards with their compassion for other sentient beings, trying to take a stand for those that can't defend themselves who unnecessarily suffer and die for the sensual gratification of others.
How dare they!
#115 - thesecretbear (05/26/2015) [-]
Ok lets take a step back and ask the big questions.
Do the animals we commonly eat have the same mental and emotional compacities as we do? If not it is an entirely different experience.
Is it truly unethical for the top predator to gain sustinance from all lower ones?
If a being is killed un-knowing of it's fate, is it more ethical than letting it know it's fate and have it go through whatever emotional turn it might.
If we look to answers from nature we will find that the very fact that there are humans that give a shit about what an animal thinks and feels, and that we don't just go out and rip them to shreds shows that we have a greater compacity for ethics than does animals.
And just as a bit for me, hunting in many cases helps control animal populations to not get out of control and starve themselves.
#153 - auryn (05/26/2015) [-]
-"Do the animals we commonly eat have the same mental and emotional compacities as we do? If not it is an entirely different experience."
Animals do not have exactly the same mental and emotional capacities as man. But animals do have a basic awareness, a nerve system with a brain, and senses, through which they experience and feel the world. They are capable of experiencing suffering, in fact even to the extent where some animals that have been abused on the long-term will show signs of psychological traumatisation.
-"Is it truly unethical for the top predator to gain sustinance from all lower ones?"
You can't compare humans with animals in this sense, there is a fundamental difference. Humans have risen above animals. There is a certain self-awareness, and a developed intellect which gives us the ability to reason, evaluate, to make judgement, and understand cause and effect.
Animals don't have this, even what intellect they may posess is completely subjugated by instinctive forces. Contrary to humans, animals don't have the choice.
So it's kind of a misleading question, because 1) Ethics means partaining to right or wrong conduct, it doesn't apply to the predators in nature for to do good or wrong you must know good or wrong, and they simply don't have the ability to know. 2) Humans aren't predators per se, they are only predator by choice. We thrive perfectly fine on a vegetarian diet.
Which means that the situation is like this, eating meat is not a necessity for us, but we do it by choice because we enjoy it.
Whether this is perceived as ethical or not is entirely dependant upon your personal moral values, so that's debatable.
For me personally I don't feel it would be ethical of me to expect others to suffer and die for the sake of some shallow sensual enjoyment, and I don't see anything or have never heard a sensible argument that could justify it. For me whether the being is superior or inferior in whatever sense or in every sense is completely beside the matter, because regardless of it I think that good conduct would be to minimize the harm done to others.
-"If a being is killed un-knowing of it's fate, is it more ethical than letting it know it's fate and have it go through whatever emotional turn it might."
I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. From what I get you're saying that it's less worse because animals do not know what's coming to them. In which I have to agree that it does make for a less worse experience for the subject than if the opposite were true. But it makes little difference in the the justification of the act itself.
Similarly to how you could rob a man gently or rob him violently, sure there's a difference, but it doesn't change the nature of the deed itself.
-"If we look to answers from nature we will find that the very fact that there are humans that give a shit about what an animal thinks and feels, and that we don't just go out and rip them to shreds shows that we have a greater compacity for ethics than does animals."
Once more I must admit I do not entirely understand why you are saying this, or if there even is a point being made. But I think and I hope that anything relevant to it has already been said in a previous answer.
(And although I do like the sound of 'compacity' (thinking of it as a portmanteau of capacity and compassion ), it's not an actual word. I'll just assume u meant to say capacity.)
-"And just as a bit for me, hunting in many cases helps control animal populations to not get out of control and starve themselves."
Natural regulates itself infallible, it didn't need humans for population control the millions of years before mankind and it isn't dependant upon them now. Even if a balance is disturbed, through the many interdependent factors in a ecosystem it will regain an equilibrium one way or the other.
This shouldn't be a deceiding factor in the matter. In fact, I suspect nature is better off without artificial population control.
#154 - auryn (05/26/2015) [-]
There is a fundamental difference when it's out of necessity, and you'll see that any of the previous statements made don't apply in such a case.
Naturally It's only a question of ethics if there is a choice to start with.
The answer to your question should be self-explanatory.
#100 - theshinypen (05/26/2015) [-]
thats retarded. Meat gave us brainpower. Ill humor you and say you meant in the modern day. We dont need any food at all. give scientists an hour and a half, they will develop a nutrient paste that gives us every single nutrient we need for that day. Wont be tasty but hell. Eating things for enjoyment is a bad thing.
#155 - auryn (05/26/2015) [-]
Are you implying that our brains couldn't have developed and evolved from plant based protein and fats?
Be my guest and specifically tell me why it is so. As far as I know there really is no direct relationship, nutrion wise.
The "meat made us smarter" is just a grossly speculative, ill-founded, disjointed and in this case a meaningless hypothesis, because it appoints indirect causes as spare energy, freeing up time and other causes that aren't aren't exclusively inherent to meat.
In fact there could be more arguments in favor of plant carbs (and their conversion to glucose) having had a more beneficial impact on the brain, than the animal fats and proteins.
#160 - auryn (05/27/2015) [-]
No, actually I'm quite happy to have a rational discussion about it, and I am curious for your arguments, though seeing how you keep avoiding it and want to end the conversation as soon as I mention it seems to be strongly suggestive that you did not have any in the first place.
So yes, if you've just come to for name-calling and making unfounded claims I guess we're done, for there's no point in that.
But if that isn't the case you're more than welcome to continue.
#163 - theshinypen (05/27/2015) [-]
Youve been nothing but polite so I apologize. also forgive any typos, im on mobile. From what ive gathered from my biology classes back when I was in college it went like this and ill give you the short of it. Im also a dropout so take it for what you will (wanted to be a park rangers but colorblond need not apply) Humans started evolving once we began eating meat simply because it was so calorie dense compared to a vegetarian diet on top of being (mostly) available throughout the year. There was a time when our ancestors ate only vegetarian like gorillas but we became scavengers, eating like hyenas and that is what gave us the calories to start developing bigger brains. Little work for damn good pay. Eventually we discovered rocks can be sharp and we started chasing animals, which meant more meat. We started getting smarter and used traps or terrain to kill huge herbivores. the cycle continues so on and so on. Now ill admit we are omnivores for a reason. Plants and shit are important(ask pirates about scurvy). In the end like all things we need a balance.
Heres a link from a 5 second google search in my attempt to fill any gaps
#164 - auryn (05/27/2015) [-]
Well, that is only confirming my earlier point of the plausible cause being being spare energy. Just a question of calories, not an inherent quality of meat itself, and not something that couldn't have been done without eating meat.
But I'm actually more interested into what convinced you that meat made us smarter, what was the most compelling argument that made you think it was likely that meat was the major instigator of the development of our intellect.
Surely you must have had your reasons to say that.
(Also, regarding the link, I don't see how an individual 1.5 million year old skull with porotic hyperostosis would be directly suggestive that eating meat made us smarter, even if it was out of malnourishment. Not even taking into account that there may be other causes for porotic hyperostosis including infections and parasites.)
#166 - theshinypen (05/27/2015) [-]
this is the best im going to be able to do.
#165 - theshinypen (05/27/2015) [-]
Like i mentioned. 5 second google search. ilearned all that shit in a community college. Remember that modern veggies are heavily modified because of heroes like norman baurlog too. Meat is also made of everything a body needs, being a body. As far as thia guy is able to educatedly guess (and im no nutritionist) is that back in those days meat was more advantangeous since it might have been denser in not only calories but nutrition as well, compared to the plants of old at least. meat was also able to be transported great distances and last with the advent of jerky. Ive always been told its the calories though since our brains take so much juice but im babbling at this point
#97 - vikingontour (05/26/2015) [-]
I just think that we like to eat meat should not be compared to burning, gassing, abusing and enslaving people.
some animals eat both vegetables and meat, but should they be denied it because they can survive with just one of those.
everyone can do whatever they want to do, as long as they dont hurt others. so if someone does not want to eat meat then please go ahead. just don´t go and say others are evil for eating meat.
But in the end, its just my opinion
|#322 - I swear to the new and the old gods, I was so close to flippin… [+] (1 new reply)||05/22/2015 on People are dumb||+2|
#426 - thesovereigngrave (05/22/2015) [-]
I'm pretty sure the Boltons are going to get royally fucked over. The other Northern Lords hate them, the fact that they're Lords of the North now doesn't change them. Hell, considering how they got the position it makes the other Northmen hate them even more.
|#10 - get them hot enough and they will melt in your arms||05/21/2015 on Snowflake||0|
|#109 - Picture||05/20/2015 on has this been posted||+19|
|#90 - What is this? a Wii U for giants||05/20/2015 on Blazed||0|
Join Subscribe ponytime