Ex Falso Quodlibet. Your moral reasoning is inconsistent, which means that you’re either a nihilist or an idiot. I thought I’d give you the benefit of the doubt.
It may be, but not for the reason you claimed. I do not care about the lives of most animals, such as chickens, etc. Do you care about the lives of animals? Is it okay to kill them? What about torture them?
From my belief framework I suspect I could find inconsistencies in your morality, but I don’t really see the point in trying to force squeeze your moral views through my belief framework- because I suspect your morality informs your beliefs and vice-versa- just as my own.
Individuals can, “collectives” cannot.
A lot of it
I am not a nihilist.
Your words say one thing, but your other words say another.
Where did I say another?
Ex Falso Quodlibet. Your moral reasoning is inconsistent, which means that you’re either a nihilist or an idiot. I thought I’d give you the benefit of the doubt.
It may be, but not for the reason you claimed. I do not care about the lives of most animals, such as chickens, etc. Do you care about the lives of animals? Is it okay to kill them? What about torture them?
From my belief framework I suspect I could find inconsistencies in your morality, but I don’t really see the point in trying to force squeeze your moral views through my belief framework- because I suspect your morality informs your beliefs and vice-versa- just as my own.
That is called psychopathy and you should seek clinical intervention.
Do you care about the lives of sardines? Is a chicken much different? How is that not arbitrary?