On April 16 2012 23:10 JimSocks wrote: don't really care what people eat. last couple years i've been traveling alot. eaten crazy stuff myself. also watch alot of bizarre foods.
On April 16 2012 10:47 sc2superfan101 wrote: i wouldn't eat dog, but i wouldn't outlaw the eating of it either...
idk, something about a dog just makes it more important to me than a pig or a cow.
That 'something' is irrational cognitive dissonance.
or, you know, it might be that i like dogs as animals and i don't like pigs or cows as animals except for when i'm eating them...
i think the term "irrational" is one of the most overused and least understood terms on the internet.
A: I like dogs, they are super cool. + B: Eating super cool stuff is not cool in my opinion. = C: I won't eat dogs.
and then:
A: i eat pigs because they are tasty and not super cool. + B: some people find dogs to be tasty and not super cool. + C: pigs and dogs are both animals, nothing really inherently special about either = D: i won't eat dogs, but have no moral problem with other people doing so.
D and C are both rational, and even better than that, they are not mutually exclusive. so, as we can see, there is absolutely nothing irrational about it.
They are not rational. You are using syllogisms which are logical tools but your premises (I think X is super cool/not super cool) are not rational ones but emotional.
You can't really have an objective (2+2=4) premise in this manner. His logic make perfect sense as it's a matter of taste
You cannot justify an argument by saying 'well if its ok with him its right', neither can you say 'its ok with him but its not ok with me therefore its wrong'. Thats cultural relativism and is more a political attitude than a moral argument. Moral Subjectivism is a very different concept.
On April 16 2012 11:49 Mirror0423 wrote: A lot of asian eat dogs because east asian countries were historically more farming based, meaning cows were not really on the menu, since if you eat your cow, you can't farm the next year, but dogs were plenty, and had less of a meaning. Even just 10 years ago eating "beef" in Korea was mostly for special occasions. On the other hand a lot of european based culture was historically more herding based, there for dogs were really not on the menu. Dogs help you keep your keeps in line. That's really all there is. Dogs were more "important" in western culture, while cows were more imporatnt in the eastern culture. If you look at almost any historical text, eating beef in Korean was reserved for very very special occasion. Slaughtering of a cow was a village event, and everyone was given a piece as it was a "celebration" of something huge when cows were beat eaten by anyone other than high royalty. This relates to how westerners see eating dogs as "inhumane" since if you eat dogs you basically put your whole family at risk, while in asian if you eat cows, you put your whole family at risk. Honestly, ask any Korean who is 30+ years old, and ask 'em how often did they eat beef when they were younger. I'm 22, and i remember just getting a burger was a special occasion thing, even after Korea was very "westernized". Now days, Korea's westernized enough that beef is a every day thing, but 10 years back, i promise you, eating steak at home was almost unimaginable, a college student eating streak was impossibly rare, and anytime people ate beef it was a big "Social event".
Thoughtful post. However, you may be wrong with the reason about the lack of beef and why people eat beef more now. The poultry industry (especially for beef) grew immensly around 10 years ago, because farmers could make MONEY off it. You have been reading recent news about the beef tragedy in Korea right? Farmers can't sell cows and now not even making enough moeny to buy food for cows. In fact, there was a news that farmers try to sell baby born cows by giving 1 manwon. This is the truth, too many people went for bredding cows and now the market collapsed. The fault is also at the retail chains where domestic price of cow meat is WAYYY cheaper than what consumers can purchase at. (I think around x10 jump), therefore, people cannot eat kalbi as much as they want to because it is so damn expensive.
Just a lot of problems. I believe the rarity of beef in Korea relates more to how the market worked and such.
Nope, I don't find it "ethically correct" to eat dog meat for the following reasons:
Dogs are mainly carnivorous animals which means that breeding dogs in order to slaughter them is a costly procedure that would lead to a waste of $$$. Feeding animals meat in order to get meat (of lesser value) in return is not just a luxury, but also absolutely reprehensible from my perspective, especially since most of us I believe are humanists and would do everything to help the needy that starve to death all over the globe.
Also, dogs by nature are animals that do not accept the isolation and neglect, both physical and mental unlike most ruminants and poultry which are less domesticated and will be content with just food and a stable to stay in. It is understood therefore that in order to grow close to people, such animals need love and affection by their "breeder". Anything else would be considered animal cruelty in my view. To kill, therefore such an animal, which you loved seems somewhat hypocritical and inappropriate to me, not toward the animal but towards yourself primarily.
On April 16 2012 23:10 JimSocks wrote: don't really care what people eat. last couple years i've been traveling alot. eaten crazy stuff myself. also watch alot of bizarre foods.
Have you eat Rat BBQ in japan?
haven't been to japan yet. but, i've had snake, spiders, and all kinds of bugs before.
also, i've traveled in poor countries. there are alot of stray dogs. i think people raise them to eat leftover garbage or something. and they also eat grains like leftover rice and stuff.
On April 16 2012 23:10 JimSocks wrote: don't really care what people eat. last couple years i've been traveling alot. eaten crazy stuff myself. also watch alot of bizarre foods.
Have you eat Rat BBQ in japan?
haven't been to japan yet. but, i've had snake, spiders, and all kinds of bugs before.
also, i've traveled in poor countries. there are alot of stray dogs. i think people raise them to eat leftover garbage or something. and they also eat grains like leftover rice and stuff.
now that remind me, I used to eat spider soup when I was a child, my grandma told me it was fish lol It was supposed to cure something that I got back then.
On April 15 2012 12:58 Lu_e wrote: No I do not believe eating "Mans best Friend" is ethical.
I'm 100% sure Dogs are more intelligent than chickens, cows and pigs. Dogs can be trained and used as awesome tools/companions.
Can this be said about cow chicken pig? c'mon now....
are you kidding me? are you literally serious? Pigs are definitly more intelligent than dogs, possibly almost as smart as other primates.
Ok excuse my ignorance I should've known pigs are used in science and have shown their intelligence. But I cant help but break down my bias;
'How to use a pig effectively'? I know dogs can;
-sniff bombs, (can a pig? perhaps. not as efficiently/acceptable as a dog some may argue. pigs running arpund airports?) -protect you, (can a pig? though it doesn't bark, it could squeal? LOL even a medium/small dog could ward off small aggressive animals/other dogs who knows, they bark LOUD and scare some things bigger than themselves such as OTHER HUMANS FROM MY HOUSE, see: burglar... LOL at a pig doing that) -help hunt game, (can a pig?; track, duck hunting/grouse retrieval?) -disabled assistance dogs, (could a pig? similar to pigs running around airports, acceptance/tolerance of society.) -avalanche rescue, (picture the pig, LOL again) -control other animals, 'herd' as mentioned before
Can you not see this? Dogs are too awesome sorry. Please entertain me with pig uses; ( if you can; other than science uses? as that is a pretty grey area which I haven't even thought of in terms of dog) I have given many real-world examples above for canine.
On April 17 2012 02:57 Lu_e wrote: -sniff bombs, (can a pig? perhaps. not as efficiently/acceptable as a dog some may argue. pigs running arpund airports?)
Here you are actually very wrong Pigs are even better as dogs here.
Well to the other points Pic COULD be trained to all these except barking i guess. But they are pretty clever animals as stated before. We arent used to train them just becouse we are used to eat them. And dogs have this fluffy fur i guess this is a hughe thing here, as well as the sharp theeth, so they were usefull back in the times we needed to fend of enemys. Except that they are both nearly the same.
On April 16 2012 23:34 kyriores wrote: Nope, I don't find it "ethically correct" to eat dog meat for the following reasons:
Dogs are mainly carnivorous animals which means that breeding dogs in order to slaughter them is a costly procedure that would lead to a waste of $$$. Feeding animals meat in order to get meat (of lesser value) in return is not just a luxury, but also absolutely reprehensible from my perspective, especially since most of us I believe are humanists and would do everything to help the needy that starve to death all over the globe.
Also, dogs by nature are animals that do not accept the isolation and neglect, both physical and mental unlike most ruminants and poultry which are less domesticated and will be content with just food and a stable to stay in. It is understood therefore that in order to grow close to people, such animals need love and affection by their "breeder". Anything else would be considered animal cruelty in my view. To kill, therefore such an animal, which you loved seems somewhat hypocritical and inappropriate to me, not toward the animal but towards yourself primarily.
lol
Vegans actually raise dogs from pups on a vegan diet. Healthy, runs around and everything. Dog's "need" meat about as much people do--as in they don't. They're omnivorous. Much like people. And will eat whatever you bring to them.
As an American I would obviously never eat dog meat and would find it pretty strange if another American ate dog meat. However you would have to be pretty ignorant to think that every culture is going to share the dietary habits of your own.
Ethics aside, this morning a relevant clip from Curb Your Enthusiasm came up on my youtube feed. I think the ending sums up how most Americans feel about the issue
On April 15 2012 08:30 Bigtony wrote: The distinction I make is that cows/chickens/etc are raised intentionally for food whereas dogs/cats/etc are domesticated for companionship. I don't think there is anything morally wrong with eating them, I just wouldn't.
Same thought as me. I mean if there was a farm to breed dogs just to eat them, then I would have to group them with anything else we eat as meat.
On April 15 2012 12:58 Lu_e wrote: No I do not believe eating "Mans best Friend" is ethical.
I'm 100% sure Dogs are more intelligent than chickens, cows and pigs. Dogs can be trained and used as awesome tools/companions.
Can this be said about cow chicken pig? c'mon now....
are you kidding me? are you literally serious? Pigs are definitly more intelligent than dogs, possibly almost as smart as other primates.
Ok excuse my ignorance I should've known pigs are used in science and have shown their intelligence. But I cant help but break down my bias;
'How to use a pig effectively'? I know dogs can;
-sniff bombs, (can a pig? perhaps. not as efficiently/acceptable as a dog some may argue. pigs running arpund airports?) -protect you, (can a pig? though it doesn't bark, it could squeal? LOL even a medium/small dog could ward off small aggressive animals/other dogs who knows, they bark LOUD and scare some things bigger than themselves such as OTHER HUMANS FROM MY HOUSE, see: burglar... LOL at a pig doing that) -help hunt game, (can a pig?; track, duck hunting/grouse retrieval?) -disabled assistance dogs, (could a pig? similar to pigs running around airports, acceptance/tolerance of society.) -avalanche rescue, (picture the pig, LOL again) -control other animals, 'herd' as mentioned before
Can you not see this? Dogs are too awesome sorry. Please entertain me with pig uses; ( if you can; other than science uses? as that is a pretty grey area which I haven't even thought of in terms of dog) I have given many real-world examples above for canine.
when it comes to smell you really can't beat pigs, Pigs are also one of the best money generators, for one Truffle hunting comes to mind.
A Samoan guy killed and barbecued his pet dog a few years back, I remember the Animal rights people making a huge deal about it on the news and stuff, and the guy's like "I did this all the time back in Samoa" According to the authorities, it's all right to eat your pets if they are killed in a humanely manner. I wholeheartedly agree.
On April 17 2012 16:35 Lorken wrote: A Samoan guy killed and barbecued his pet dog a few years back, I remember the Animal rights people making a huge deal about it on the news and stuff, and the guy's like "I did this all the time back in Samoa" According to the authorities, it's all right to eat your pets if they are killed in a humanely manner. I wholeheartedly agree.
Aren't or weren't Samoans cannibals aswell?
If it's ok to eat pets then i guess it should be ok to eat humans aswell. If they are killed in a humanely manner that is.
On April 16 2012 10:47 sc2superfan101 wrote: i wouldn't eat dog, but i wouldn't outlaw the eating of it either...
idk, something about a dog just makes it more important to me than a pig or a cow.
That 'something' is irrational cognitive dissonance.
or, you know, it might be that i like dogs as animals and i don't like pigs or cows as animals except for when i'm eating them...
i think the term "irrational" is one of the most overused and least understood terms on the internet.
A: I like dogs, they are super cool. + B: Eating super cool stuff is not cool in my opinion. = C: I won't eat dogs.
and then:
A: i eat pigs because they are tasty and not super cool. + B: some people find dogs to be tasty and not super cool. + C: pigs and dogs are both animals, nothing really inherently special about either = D: i won't eat dogs, but have no moral problem with other people doing so.
D and C are both rational, and even better than that, they are not mutually exclusive. so, as we can see, there is absolutely nothing irrational about it.
They are not rational. You are using syllogisms which are logical tools but your premises (I think X is super cool/not super cool) are not rational ones but emotional.
You can't really have an objective (2+2=4) premise in this manner. His logic make perfect sense as it's a matter of taste
You cannot justify an argument by saying 'well if its ok with him its right', neither can you say 'its ok with him but its not ok with me therefore its wrong'. Thats cultural relativism and is more a political attitude than a moral argument. Moral Subjectivism is a very different concept.
Its not cultural relativism, you're just misunderstanding. Because a decision is based on emotion doesn't necessarily make it irrational. I would be disgusted if I ate a pile of shit. That is an emotional response. Do I care if you eat shit? Go for it. I do not like playing baseball. This is emotional, I simply don't enjoy the game. Do I care if you do? Nope. I don't like smoking weed as I simply don't enjoy the high. Irrational? I think not, just as I don't think you enjoying it is irrational. What about having intercourse with a male? I'm not down, but you can go for it. All emotionally based decisions that are not irrational.