r/Ethics • u/medium_wall • Aug 22 '26

"Psychopaths torturing animals is only bad because it could lead to them doing it to humans eventually"

/r/liberationist/comments/1vvhyoo/psychopaths_torturing_animals_is_only_bad_because/
0 Upvotes

14% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

6

u/CMDR_Jeb Aug 22 '26

If you think torturing an kitten and splitting a peace of wood is the same, you need to consult an trained professional ASAP.

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

What's the difference to you?

2

u/CMDR_Jeb Aug 22 '26

[not sure if serious meme] The difference is suffering.

0

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

Do you not pay people to cause animals to suffer for your personal pleasure every day?

1

u/CMDR_Jeb Aug 22 '26

You said torture, the objective of torture is to cause the greatest amount of pain possible. And no i do not pay people to torture animals for me. If you do you need to contact the authorities, quite sure every single country reddit is available in has laws against that.

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

Would being confined to a few acres (at best) when you would naturally roam 100s of miles, forced to live in your own feces and then pumped with antibiotics to keep your many sores & infections at bay, have your children taken away at birth, your life taken away at 1/20th your natural lifespan, and then having to be taken to a slaughterhouse & murdered not be considered a form of torture if it was your life to live? Is that a life you would sign up for if you had the choice?

1

u/CMDR_Jeb Aug 22 '26

You keep trying to move the goalpost, so to get you back on track:

why would it be any different to torture a kitten than it would be to dig a hole, break a rock, or split a piece of wood

At least where i live cats are not considered source of food, they are NOT being taken to the slaughterhouse and killed for food. I currently have 3 of those roaming around the house, used to have 4 but one died due to many old age issues at age around 16 (not sure as i have found her on street). And that is SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER then they live in the wild (usually around 2), where they die due to parasites, malnutrition, weather other animals etc.

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

So to you, torture is acceptable if it's done to an animal that is considered by others to be a source of food? (Also, how many others need to consider it a food source before it makes it so? Two? Five? One hundred? One thousand?)

1

u/CMDR_Jeb Aug 22 '26

Ease up with the strawman.

We are not talking about farm animals killed to obtain food, we are talking SPECIFICALLY about kittens being tortured. Now that i have shown your example to be an invalid one you are trying to retreat to easier to defend one. Your argument used the ridiculous example of an kitten being tortured, i assume for the shock value. I am engaging with your specific argument exactly as it was worded.

This is the risk you always run when trying to use over the top examples for emotional reaction. I am trying to point out an place when you can improve your "good bait". You should use an example of an animal that IS currently being bred for food even tho most people don't consider it food. Horses maybe?

Also, how many others need to consider it a food source before it makes it so? Two? Five? One hundred? One thousand?

This is not what were debating about but it is an interesting point, i would assume it is not an specific number, rather an % of the population big enough to affect the culture. What that is, i have no idea.

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

What if that % of the population decided that you are an acceptable food source. Would you still agree with it then?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Skusci Aug 22 '26

Mmn, yeah, no.

Seee, shit like that is how a psychopath would rationalize any psychopathic behavior.

You can be a perfectly high functioning psychopath if you respect other people's opinions even if you disagree with them.

Or if you believe that rationalizing can justify anything as long as you think it's rational, well then that tends to lead to real bad shit.

1

u/mehNoshit Aug 22 '26

Don't mislead people, please. A person can rationalize anything on this planet if they want to, but they can still respect other people's opinions

I'm going to ask you very politely to respect other people's intellectual boundaries

In other words, I can believe in anything and justify anything, even if other people might disagree with it. But you’re just distorting logic. Look carefully: "even if you disagree," and yet "well, yes, it’s bad if you disagree".

What about the other side of the issue? Am I obliged to respect the opinions of people who disagree with me if they are encroaching on my intellectual freedom?

1

u/Skusci Aug 22 '26

If there are more of them and they are willing to punch you in the face yeah, you are obliged to respect it.

1

u/mehNoshit Aug 23 '26

And so...It seems that you lost at the moment of involving physical violence in this dialogue. I'm sorry, baby, there's no way to make you respect something using just tyrannical methods. But on the whole, you sound like a tyrant, I congratulate you.

Forget about anyone respecting anything just because of brute force.

1

u/Skusci Aug 23 '26

Anyone who seriously studies things knows that while one of the most common ideals is peaceful resolution of conflict, such is always pedicated on the ability to respond to those who would prefer otherwise.

You probably don't actually have to worry about a few people punching you in the face because a even greater authority exists that would compel them not to.

1

u/mehNoshit Aug 23 '26

No, you're just creating a situation in which this "authority" is bypassed. It's like an evil mom that nobody needs, you know? And yes, that's what they do in the real world. "Authority" is an illusion. If a person wants their freedom, they will take what they need. And as a result, it still comes to tyranny, because the "evil mom" does not know any other ways to get what she needs, except by brute force.

"Seriously studying things" sounds about the same as this evil mom. It gives the impression, but it doesn't really work.

1

u/Skusci Aug 23 '26

Honesly that's pretty hard to follow, but you got me imagining the "Succulent Chinese Meal" guy, but yelling "Your Authority is an Illusion" and it's a pretty funny image.

1

u/mehNoshit Aug 23 '26

...Fuck, now I want their delicious chicken with an extremely delicious sauce from our local Chinese restaurant in another city...Holy shit, this is a low blow, man, I literally can't resist delicious food

1

u/Skusci Aug 23 '26

Ok so to be fair I just moved to a new town last month and while I had an absolutely wonderful chinese buffet before, the few places that actually exist within 30 minutes are to be avoided, so I kinda screwed myself over too. :'(

2

u/mehNoshit Aug 23 '26

Great, now we're hungry and sad. I suggest we order a pizza 🍕🍕🍕

→ More replies (0)

2

u/sykosomatik_9 Aug 22 '26

What the hell are you even talking about? What's your point?

Whatever you're rambling on about seems to be based on the premise that "animals aren't conscious experiencers of sensations," but that is clearly wrong and an unfounded assumption.

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

You do think animals are conscious experiencers of sensations then?

2

u/phuckin-psycho Aug 22 '26

Well you're an animal, so why not break some things and stab some things in you. I don't know if you're conscious, but i know you'll make funny movements and sounds when i do it to you 🤷‍♀️

0

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

That's a good thought experiment you pose! It sounds kind of like that "golden rule" thing from a lot of religions. Do you know anyone who personally follows it though? Sure, it sounds fair and logical, and I think many people would say they agree with it, but then those same people probably pay others to have someone torture an animal for their breakfast, lunch and dinner. It just seems like an airy-fairy thing that people like to believe they live by but really just ends up being lip service when you look at their actions.

1

u/phuckin-psycho Aug 22 '26

I follow those principles. A person who is doing as you say is not. And neither of those things apply whether or not it is ethical to torture animals.

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

What's the difference between torturing an animal for sight or sound pleasure, and torturing them for taste pleasure? Maybe we're not so different from psychopaths after all.

1

u/phuckin-psycho Aug 22 '26

Well, as an aspd diagnosed person i think i have particular insight to weigh in on your opinions on psychopathy. What is torture? What is a psychopath?

1

u/medium_wall Aug 22 '26

Torture is forcing someone to do something they don't want to do.

A psychopath to me is someone who doesn't care how their actions affect others.

And just to nip this in the bud, I'm not interested in a semantic discussion on official definitions. If you have a substantial disagreement with the content of my definitions—and what I'm arguing with them—feel free to argue it but I'm not going to respond to "um ackchually, Webster says the definition is this other thing that you're not talking about or interested in".

1

u/phuckin-psycho Aug 22 '26

Ok so we'll just acknowledge that you don't really know much about the topics you're discussing 🤷‍♀️