South Korea plans to resume whaling - Page 8

sc14s

United States5052 Posts

July 05 2012 21:53 GMT

#141

On July 05 2012 20:42 Bleak wrote:
Human is a disgusting species.

I love how people say things like this and it only shows them to be just as bad because they lump the whole species together ~_~ yes yes we are ALL hunting whales sir everyone of us, we also all killed jews in WW2 in the deathcamps and anyone who commits a crime means the whole species is at fault.

sc14s

United States5052 Posts

July 05 2012 21:54 GMT

#142

On July 05 2012 21:15 jpak wrote:
Wait. South korea has an agenda against whales too?

FUCK YOU DOLPHIN! FUCK YOU WHALE!

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/dolphin_punch

Medrea

10003 Posts

July 05 2012 21:58 GMT

#143

You know if you keep killing whales they are gonna die. Its true. They don't really replenish all that fast.

-eXalt

United States462 Posts

July 05 2012 22:02 GMT

#144

inc Whale Wars ROFL

semantics

10040 Posts

July 05 2012 22:14 GMT

#145

it's whales, what makes whales worth more then fish or turtles? Most whale species that are taken by whaling aren't even close to endangered, and when they are it's often that subspecies that lives in that one area and doesn't thrive there. Really i'm fine with hunting all animals(people withstanding) for food, science, industry etc. As long as it's done so that it doesn't totally wipe them off the planet, like we do with some fish species. After all we want to continue to do it we should be at least smart enough to not do it to death.

sc14s

United States5052 Posts

July 05 2012 22:18 GMT

#146

On July 06 2012 07:14 semantics wrote:
it's whales, what makes whales worth more then fish or turtles? Most whale species that are taken by whaling aren't even close to endangered, and when they are it's often that subspecies that lives in that one area and doesn't thrive there. Really i'm fine with hunting all animals(people withstanding) for food, science, industry etc. As long as it's done so that it doesn't totally wipe them off the planet, like we do with some fish species. After all we want to continue to do it we should be at least smart enough to not do it to death.

thats the thing though, its difficult to stop when it does need to be stopped so its best to keep the regulations there.. people think in the short term and not the long term usually.

Bill Murray

United States9292 Posts

July 05 2012 22:19 GMT

#147

why cant they be like the rest of the world and be satisfied with chicken and cow?
South Korean BBQ =/= Whale

ImAbstracT

519 Posts

July 05 2012 22:23 GMT

#148

Am I the only one that really doesn't give a crap?

SlitZ

Sweden42 Posts

July 05 2012 22:23 GMT

#149

This is wrong.

Go eat insects or something, ton of them out there.

Schlootle

United States54 Posts

July 05 2012 22:25 GMT

#150

I see no issue in this, as long as the whales they hunt are not endangered there is no problem. Its the same thing with Japan, they do not hunt whales that are endangered. I do not see why people get so up in arms about this, its basically the same thing with chickens, cows, turkeys, fish, pigs and goats. We eat animals and plants, that's just life for you. Unless any species we commercially hunt is endangered, get over it.

Edit:
Having read what type of whale they are actually hunting, I am now a little iffy. The numbers have recovered, but I would prefer if they would go after more populous whales instead.

Azarkon

United States21060 Posts

July 05 2012 22:33 GMT

#151

On July 06 2012 06:09 Masamune wrote:

Show nested quote +

On July 06 2012 03:20 Azarkon wrote:

On July 06 2012 03:10 Masamune wrote:

On July 06 2012 02:39 Azarkon wrote:

On July 06 2012 02:29 Masamune wrote:

On July 06 2012 02:15 Azarkon wrote:

On July 06 2012 02:09 Spicy_Curry wrote:
Humans are the only animals that hunt for more than they need. Its disgusting.

Predators in nature waste a lot of meat each time they kill. Have you seen what happens after a lion takes down an antelope? The lion doesn't eat the entire antelope. It eats choice bites, then leaves the carcass for scavengers. A lot of scavengers have a niche because predators are wasteful.

Not just that, but there are predators besides humans who kill for 'pleasure'. Take cats, for example. There are a lot of well-fed pet cats who go after rats just because - they don't kill rats because they are hungry and need to eat; they kill them because they want to.

Yes and in nature, most species are patriarchal and rape serves as an adaption. Does that mean we should just succumb to our primal behaviour because other species do and allow it to creep back into our society?

And fyi, predators in nature waste meat because they have no form of preservation like we do. Instead of carrying around a rotting piece of meat, it serves a better purpose to just hunt another animal again. The first humans in the Americas did this when they drove many species to extinction but I can't blame them because they didn't know any better and were trying to survive. We know better now so let's show it?

Being morally 'better' than animals is a human conceit; there is nothing 'animal' about it. But being a human conceit, it is comprehensibly only to other humans and in the context of our societies/cultures/ideologies. The statement that humans are 'evil' / 'disgusting' because we hunt whales has nothing to do with nature and everything to do with our social conceptions, which are not necessarily shared by other societies/cultures/ideologies.

My bringing this into this thread is to remind people how socially constructed their world views are. Animals never think about whether they're wasting food / driving prey into extinction / hunting for meat instead of pleasure / etc. People, living in modern, first world societies, who have been educated under the doctrines of environmentalism, and who are disconnected from the act of hunting and killing prey because all they experience is grocery store->kitchen->table, do.

Skip the moral blanketing about humans being bad, and talk about how SK is trying to violate an international treaty via a loophole, and we're better off for discussions. I don't see how pontificating about how bad humans are because we won't follow each other's socially constructed moral standards is going to help.

Don't try and create strawman arguments with me because I never once touched on the topics of evil and morality. Leave your college classes on ethics and morality at the door please.

As a species with an advanced form of cognition, we have the ability to make our society a better one (which ultimately is for our own "selfish" purposes and a topic of another discussion). Instead of condoning some of the things we do because it's natural and seen in nature (such as your comparison of human wasting to animals), we can try and curtail it a bit to better help us all.

But you did. You said that we need to act 'better' than animals because we are humans. This is a fundamentally moral argument, because what is 'better' is contingent on social/cultural/ideological forces and you have shown no different. You have never explained what makes preserving endangered species 'better' than not preserving them, and short of that you are a product of the environmentalist social mores that are conditioned into people in the West these days. Thus, you are making a moral argument, not a logical one.

I ask again - why is preserving endangered species 'better' than not preserving them? Is it not natural for species that are unable to adapt to their environment to perish? Isn't that the entire process of selection and evolution?

lol how is it a fundamentally moral argument? It actually has nothing to do with morals and is quite logical. Once again the strawman...

Given human intelligence and our ability to reason, we have two options in regards to this situation:
A) Live in apathy and let natural selection take its course.
B) Make easy alterations in our lives to preserve biodiversity, which can be as asset in the future.

I'm not advocating that we take option B because of some moral obligation but because it is the option which benefits society the most. We already do many things that go against nature to benefit and progress society, so why should this be any different? Humans are generally considered a patriarchal species, but yet we employ women equality and literacy in the West and it, in turn, helps to preserve our advanced and developed society. You make the claim for allowing natural selection to take its course, so are you also saying that we should just revert back to our normal behaviour and allow civil rights to dissolve because it goes in tandem with our innateness? This is the case in other societies and transcends "social/cultural/ideological forces" but would it be a beneficial choice for ours? The same case could be made for preserving biodiversity on this Earth. South Korea may have different social and cultural codes of conduct than mine, but when it starts to potentially infringe on my life, I take issue with it. For all I care they can enslave their women, but don't touch the whales

How's that for morals?

If there is any assumption to be made, it's that you are the product of internet conditioning that believes environmentalism to be a wasted effort and should be ignored completely because of a few introductory college classes. Honestly, it's getting stale.

Hmm, from what I see, you are greatly confused about what your argument is.

Your main gist in those paragraphs is that letting whales go extinct is equivalent to reverting back to primitivism, thereby unmaking the social progress humans have made. But this is a false analogy: human progress is not fundamentally predicated on environmentalism, and one is able to have one without the other. Indeed, the two are opposed in a lot of ways. For example, in order to have the advanced, technological society that we have today, huge swaths of natural habitats had to be transformed into resources that service humans - to the detriment of their animal and plant inhabitants. There is nothing logical in the fear mongering statement that allowing whales to go extinct is tantamount to repealing social progress.

This is a large flaw in your ideological stance. Your advocacy of betterment for ourselves is in the service of a humanistic moral philosophy, and the examples that you gave regarding gender equality, civil rights, etc. are all examples from human morality. But instead of stopping there, you then draw the false analogy between human morality and animal rights, believing that the securement of one requires the securement of the other. This is the very tacic of animal rights groups in the West - to equate animal rights with human rights and therefore environmentalism with moral humanism - which makes my notions about your conditioning all the easier to support.

What you further fail to understand is that, because you depend on tenets from a moralistic human philosophy to support your environmentalist stance, you are making moral arguments. Gender equality, for example, is not a law of nature, but because the variants of moral humanism popular in the West today posit that equal rights and opportunity is a fundamental positive desirable to all humans, gender equality is an ethical tenet of Western moral humanism. That your notion of progress and advanced society is tied to ethical - and specifically humanly ethical - principles is what makes your arguments moral.

In the case that your goal is to avoid a moral argument, you are better off sticking to the personal argument, which constitutes the best logical argument in your arsenal against whale hunting - you oppose whale hunting because it infringes on your life, because killing off whales -> you and your children are no longer able to enjoy them in whatever capacity you enjoy them now. This is a logical, utilitarian argument, and your confusion lies in thinking that your other arguments, and not this one, is your primary rational thrust.

Diizzy

United States828 Posts

July 05 2012 22:34 GMT

#152

yeah it all starts that way. then all of a sudden a new species is endangered. the damage cant be reverse and they die off. messing up the ecosystem. its not like whales breed like insects.

riotjune

United States3394 Posts

July 05 2012 22:35 GMT

#153

A damn shame, I like whales

Tiegrr

United States607 Posts

July 05 2012 22:39 GMT

#154

Whale Wars needed something to do and a new branch anyways.

teaCher

Canada521 Posts

July 05 2012 22:39 GMT

#155

Koreans are so smart, yet they want to hunt an endangered species?????????
Makes no sense.... stop whaling, more sc...

SnipedSoul

Canada2158 Posts

July 05 2012 22:40 GMT

#156

On July 06 2012 07:39 Tiegrr wrote:
Whale Wars needed something to do and a new branch anyways.

Seeing whale wars invade sovereign waters would be hilarious.

stevarius

United States1394 Posts

July 05 2012 23:00 GMT

#157

There are a ton of whale species on the endangered species list.

Whaling is retarded. I love how people make the comparison to killing pigs, but pigs are in huge supply and taste fucking fantastic compared to other animals like dogs, etc. You don't use a hammer to drive a screw.

askTeivospy

1525 Posts

July 05 2012 23:03 GMT

#158

On July 06 2012 07:39 teaCher wrote:
Koreans are so smart, yet they want to hunt an endangered species?????????
Makes no sense.... stop whaling, more sc...

koreans are no smarter than the next nationality O_O

also lol@ guy who said humans are a disgusting species as if he is on some upper echelon. No we aren't, we're a gr8 species O_O

Ysellian

Netherlands9029 Posts

July 05 2012 23:11 GMT

#159

Well this is quite depressing.

Tewks44

United States2032 Posts

July 05 2012 23:20 GMT

#160

On July 06 2012 08:03 askTeivospy wrote:

Show nested quote +

koreans are no smarter than the next nationality O_O

also lol@ guy who said humans are a disgusting species as if he is on some upper echelon. No we aren't, we're a gr8 species O_O

global statistics beg to differ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nations_and_intelligence

but on topic, I don't see a problem with hunting whales as long as it doesn't endanger the population. It's kind of a cultural thing, in the west we're taught to love whales and that they're peaceful and majestic creatures and such. However, if the population can sustain being hunted, I see no problem with it.

Prev 1 6 7 8 9 10 18 Next All

Please or register to reply.

South Korea plans to resume whaling - Page 8

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming