Philosophical Vegan Forum

Can you chill out guys?

How about you restate each of your arguments, from scratch, in 100 words without quoting each other, and start over from there.

RedAppleGP wrote: I'm pretty sure you could've figured out by yourself that it involved actual real life society, not reading something on the internet.

That's not what it seemed like because you didn't clarify.

I don't know if you saw this, because I edited it in after I posted (though before you replied), but I wrote:

I wrote:Not sure what this means. Everyone is in a society.

Unless you mean only lazy people who are lazy in regards to helping society, but you didn't clarify that until later.

The point I was making by pointing out you were being lazy is that everyone is lazy sometimes. And how do you decide when someone is too lazy in regards to helping society? Everyone is lazy in regards to that sometimes as well. Where do you draw the line with this stuff?

Also, I want to clarify, I wasn't calling you lazy as a person; I was just saying you were being kinda lazy. And I really meant it in a lighthearted way to make a serious point (what I quoted above). I didn't mean it as a real insult as you seem to have taken. My last few posts to you were admittedly a bit rude, because I was annoyed at how you were responding, and at one point I thought you were likely trolling, but before I was just trying to make a point.
I also thought you were being hypocritical, and was annoyed by that, but it was mainly lighthearted.

RedAppleGP wrote:later what?

Not sure what you mean. I said that you didn't clarify what you meant until later.

RedAppleGP wrote:I guess you're too lazy to figure that out.

No, I just couldn't know, because you didn't use the words lesser of two evil, and I didn't have a reason to believe that's what you were referring to, because you were talking about ignoring morality (to an extent).

RedAppleGP wrote:It just depends on the situation.

Can you give an example in which morality isn't the only factor you'd consider? If it's this one, what else would you consider?

RedAppleGP wrote:sure whatever you say

That's what it seems like to me. If you meant something else, then why don't you clarify?

RedAppleGP wrote:I have addressed it somewhere. Go back and find it.

I can't find anything. Why don't you just clarify?

RedAppleGP wrote:No, because it's irrelevant to this discussion at hand, and isn't really worth my time, child (which is how you're acting right now). My arguments were relevant. Don't just throw red herrings out there.

You're acting as bad as Chris was in the suicide thread.

I didn't mean you should actually read it.

I was making the point that it's not lazy to refuse to read things you think are likely BS with the example of you not wanting to read an essay on creationism. It's an analogy; I'm not trying to change the discussion.

RedAppleGP wrote: You couldn't come up with a good comeback, so you came up with that, which we both know is a moot point.
I'm fairly certain there are some arguments that can be taken in to consideration, but that's not what we're talking about.
Stop being a jackass.

It's not about having a 'comeback'. I'm not trying to 'win'. It's not like that.
And now you're essentially calling me dishonest. Really?

It's an analogy to explain why I disagree with you.

RedAppleGP wrote:Why did you delete the part where I mentioned the nuclear war head?

I thought that was trolling, because it seemed random, and I didn't know what you meant by Murka (America, but at the time I was just like WTF).

RedAppleGP wrote:Again, you'd have to read Thus Spoke Zarathustra to know what the Friedrich was talking about.

You can't really blame me for confusing your real arguments and trolling with stuff like this.

RedAppleGP wrote:Can you seriously not figure it out?

No, I don't understand why you think using technology slows down our evolution.

brimstoneSalad wrote:Can you chill out guys?

I thought it was obvious I was being rhetorical.

brimstoneSalad wrote: How about you restate each of your arguments, from scratch, in 100 words without quoting each other, and start over from there.

alright

EquALLity wrote:That's not what it seemed like because you didn't clarify.

I don't know if you saw this, because I edited it in after I posted (though before you replied),

So you were too lazy to figure that out for yourself.


Un

EquALLity wrote:less you mean only lazy people who are lazy in regards to helping society, but you didn't clarify that until later.

So are you too lazy to acknowledge it now?

EquALLity wrote: The point I was making by pointing out you were being lazy is that everyone is lazy sometimes. And how do you decide when someone is too lazy in regards to helping society? Everyone is lazy in regards to that sometimes as well. Where do you draw the line with this stuff?

I refer you to the answer I gave earlier.

EquALLity wrote:Also, I want to clarify, I wasn't calling you lazy as a person; I was just saying you were being kinda lazy. And I really meant it in a lighthearted way to make a serious point (what I quoted above). I didn't mean it as a real insult as you seem to have taken. My last few posts to you were admittedly a bit rude, because I was annoyed at how you were responding, and at one point I thought you were likely trolling, but before I was just trying to make a point.

You were too lazy to come up with an actual argument then is that right?

EquALLity wrote:I also thought you were being hypocritical, and was annoyed by that, but it was mainly lighthearted.

So you were too lazy to acknowledge that I wasn't being lazy.

EquALLity wrote:Not sure what you mean. I said that you didn't clarify what you meant until later.

So you were too lazy to go back and check what it was?

EquALLity wrote: No, I just couldn't know, because you didn't use the words lesser of two evil, and I didn't have a reason to believe that's what you were referring to, because you were talking about ignoring morality (to an extent).

So you were too lazy to find out the difference?

EquALLity wrote: Can you give an example in which morality isn't the only factor you'd consider? If it's this one, what else would you consider?

Making racist/sexist/homophobic/degrading/prejudice/dirty jokes, laughing at situations that should be taken seriously, etc..
Were you that lazy to not think of that?

EquALLity wrote:That's what it seems like to me. If you meant something else, then why don't you clarify?

Clarify what?

RedAppleGP wrote:I have addressed it somewhere. Go back and find it.

I can't find anything. Why don't you just clarify?

EquALLity wrote: I didn't mean you should actually read it.

But I did. I wasn't lazy like you.

EquALLity wrote:I was making the point that it's not lazy to refuse to read things you think are likely BS with the example of you not wanting to read an essay on creationism. It's an analogy; I'm not trying to change the discussion.

If you are not reading this very sentence, you just proved my point.

EquALLity wrote: It's not about having a 'comeback'. I'm not trying to 'win'. It's not like that.
And now you're essentially calling me dishonest. Really?

Yes. And you're lazy.

EquALLity wrote: It's an analogy to explain why I disagree with you.

Don't be lazy and read this thread: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2183

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2183I thought that was trolling, because it seemed random, and I didn't know what you meant by Murka (America, but at the time I was just like WTF).[/quote]
I was serious, you were just too lazy to make a response to that.

EquALLity wrote: You can't really blame me for confusing your real arguments and trolling with stuff like this.

No, I don't understand why you think using technology slows down our evolution.

To be honest I stopped caring about this argument a little while ago

See, now I'm trying to be an asshole.

^I thought my clarification about what I meant when I said you were being lazy would fix things, but obviously you don't want to have a discussion. I'm not sure what your problem is, so whatever I guess.

This is actually the only good video I've seen defending scientology:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZZZSnSKQL8
What do you guys think?

If you say" L Ron Hubbard" with a mouth full of doughnut, it sounds like "I want donuts". I'm convinced.

As someone who is concerned about the well-being of their lawn, is it okay to use fertilizer that poisons Japanese beetle larvae?

RedAppleGP wrote:As someone who is concerned about the well-being of their lawn, is it okay to use fertilizer that poisons Japanese beetle larvae?

Your lawn isn't food, nor is it medicine, or anything of value to humankind. Modern grass lawns are a blight on the Earth, and the excessive, unregulated, and inexperienced application of pesticides and fertilizers to lawns is extremely damaging.

I say till the grass and plant a garden.
That is, if the area you live allows it.

brimstoneSalad wrote:Your lawn isn't food, nor is it medicine, or anything of value to humankind. Modern grass lawns are a blight on the Earth, and the excessive, unregulated, and inexperienced application of pesticides and fertilizers to lawns is extremely damaging.

I say till the grass and plant a garden.
That is, if the area you live allows it.

I already do have something of a garden in the front of my house. I'm talking about the grass.