Bicycling wastes gas ?

I found this interesting and thought I would pass it on. I never considered the fact that what and how I eat had this much of an impact on anything more than my own health and well being. Chalk one up for the Veggiemonster :)

http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/energy.html

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Vilda on October 3, 2010 at 3:36pm

Eating meat also makes you a gay devil worshipper!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dr. Doom on October 3, 2010 at 5:32pm

The point is that it isn't okay to do something just because it's pleasurable. I assume you'd accept that it wouldn't be okay to eat meat if a child's head exploded every time you ate a tasty cheeseburger. If you accept that, we're just arguing over exactly how bad the consequences of meat eating are, and whether they're so bad that it's actually wrong to eat meat. There's clearly a parallel, if an over the top one, to taking delight in underage Thai girls.

I wouldn't say the consequences are so bad that no one should eat meat, ever, but I would say that some vast, overwhelming percentage of meat eating is indefensible ethically and possibly morally. I'd also say that calling someone preachy isn't a good way of refuting the point they're making.

I'm totally confused as to how eating meat is on the same moral ground as being a pedophile.

It's not actually a straw man argument (my mistake, I apologize), because the two arguments aren't even remotely similar. Drawing parallels between the two isn't a logical fallacy - because it's not even remotely logical.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Vilda on October 4, 2010 at 2:22am

I kinda wish a kids head exploded everytime I ate meat. Have you met some of the shitbag kids out there? :-)

Dr. Doom said:

The point is that it isn't okay to do something just because it's pleasurable. I assume you'd accept that it wouldn't be okay to eat meat if a child's head exploded every time you ate a tasty cheeseburger. If you accept that, we're just arguing over exactly how bad the consequences of meat eating are, and whether they're so bad that it's actually wrong to eat meat. There's clearly a parallel, if an over the top one, to taking delight in underage Thai girls.

I wouldn't say the consequences are so bad that no one should eat meat, ever, but I would say that some vast, overwhelming percentage of meat eating is indefensible ethically and possibly morally. I'd also say that calling someone preachy isn't a good way of refuting the point they're making.

I'm totally confused as to how eating meat is on the same moral ground as being a pedophile.

It's not actually a straw man argument (my mistake, I apologize), because the two arguments aren't even remotely similar. Drawing parallels between the two isn't a logical fallacy - because it's not even remotely logical.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tank-Ridin' Ryan on October 4, 2010 at 3:34am

Ok, so I wasn't incorrect in calling it a straw man. (I take back my apology! hehe)

H3N3 said:

A straw man argument would be twisting someone's position to make it sound like they were arguing something much more indefensible than they actually are.

A good example would be, say, if someone were to state that arguing that something, e.g. consuming meat, is OK because it's pleasurable is weak, and then were to give a specific example to illustrate that weakness by giving different scenario in which that sort of argument would be offensive to most, e.g. underage prostitution in a country in which it is widespread, and then someone were to proclaim that that person is trying to say that eating meat is on the same moral ground as partaking of child prostitution- that person would be engaging in a straw-man argument.

You don't know anyone who would do that, do you?

Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:
I'm totally confused as to how eating meat is on the same moral ground as being a pedophile.

It's not actually a straw man argument (my mistake, I apologize), because the two arguments aren't even remotely similar. Drawing parallels between the two isn't a logical fallacy - because it's not even remotely logical.

H3N3 said:
Straw Man= something someone says that you don't like?

Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:
I just wish I could see past the straw man and through all the holier-than-thou BS to his righteousness.

H3N3 said:
He's kind of right though.

.

Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:
Wow.

Jason said:
And as I said before, "I eat meat because it tastes good" is a weak argument IMO. In light of all the evidence of what the costs of a meat rich diet are to the planet, it's health and ultimately and literally our own health as a species, that's basically the same argument as saying "I have sex with underage girls in brothels in Thailand because it is physically pleasurable."

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tank-Ridin' Ryan on October 4, 2010 at 3:35am

LOL But Gabe, won't you pleeeease think of the children?

Gabe said:

I kinda wish a kids head exploded everytime I ate meat. Have you met some of the shitbag kids out there? :-)

Dr. Doom said:
The point is that it isn't okay to do something just because it's pleasurable. I assume you'd accept that it wouldn't be okay to eat meat if a child's head exploded every time you ate a tasty cheeseburger. If you accept that, we're just arguing over exactly how bad the consequences of meat eating are, and whether they're so bad that it's actually wrong to eat meat. There's clearly a parallel, if an over the top one, to taking delight in underage Thai girls.

I wouldn't say the consequences are so bad that no one should eat meat, ever, but I would say that some vast, overwhelming percentage of meat eating is indefensible ethically and possibly morally. I'd also say that calling someone preachy isn't a good way of refuting the point they're making.

I'm totally confused as to how eating meat is on the same moral ground as being a pedophile.

It's not actually a straw man argument (my mistake, I apologize), because the two arguments aren't even remotely similar. Drawing parallels between the two isn't a logical fallacy - because it's not even remotely logical.