Debating a 'moral anti-realist'?

Armchair politics, ethical soapbox and current affairs. Place to discuss vegan ethics and general ethics and politics. Be nice.

Moderators: hardcore iv, bronco, fredrikw, JP, Rochellita

Re: Debating a 'moral anti-realist'?

Postby etherspin » Wed Mar 07, 2012 8:49 am

rattus wrote:
JP wrote:
etherspin wrote:My question would be "which would you object to more, me running my lawn mover over 50 square metres of lawn or 50 square metres of kittens ?" :mrgreen:


hole in one :D


And if the answer is "I couldn't care less"?


I'd be stoked to have a different answer to the question for once and would instantly give them a fatal blow to the brain for being a dangerous sociopath

I'd doubt their sincerity though,really.
Would such a person thieve and rape their brains out (being careful with an eye to self preservation I suppose).

My original question is a bit of a joke but is also to cut the BS and get down to the nitty gritty - so many people I have spoken to about ethics (who were anti vegan) try to out talk me or talk round in circles and when a point is validly addressed they will quickly change their example or hypothetical rather than concede a point. Another tactic is to make veganism seems overly complicated,esoteric,symbolic or ineffectual - all reasons I like the kitten/lawn grass dilemma !
User avatar
etherspin
Active Member
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:15 pm

Previous

Return to Ethics, Politics and Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest