Great comments on new #namethetrait video

[DrSinger]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQqakQDnKio&lc=Ugz37lno_r_oa9h9K3d4AaABAg

some more good comments

[brimstoneSalad]

EDIT: added the quote and modified it a little bit. I'm not sure how you want to deal with the youtube link so I just dropped it below the paragraph

Ideally we could snip that section of video and upload it, then link to the file on the Wiki or place inline if it's important. Then people don't have to go to youtube to find the clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQqakQDnKio&lc=Ugz37lno_r_oa9h9K3d4AaABAg

some more good comments

I read for a while, but I couldn't find them, they may have been overrun and pushed down too far.

[DrSinger]

Ideally we could snip that section of video and upload it, then link to the file on the Wiki or place inline if it's important. Then people don't have to go to youtube to find the clip.

I agree that it would be best to crop it to a clip

I read for a while, but I couldn't find them, they may have been overrun and pushed down too far.

They're under Ask Yourself's comment

'VegAnimation: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGAZkTnSJ2AVrE88HXMV7AA?sub_confirmation=1

Age's first vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMTvQdufzG0&feature=youtu.be

Vote below if I should refute Philo's salty article or work on other content: http://philosophicalvegan.com/wiki/index.php/NameTheTrait'

It should be the highlighted comment from the link

[brimstoneSalad]

Ideally we could snip that section of video and upload it, then link to the file on the Wiki or place inline if it's important. Then people don't have to go to youtube to find the clip.

I agree that it would be best to crop it to a clip

Do you know how to do that easily?
I'm not sure how.
Maybe Red or NonZeroSum can help out.

Thanks, found the comments:

VegAnimation.png

AskYourself.png

Does Ask Yourself not realize the Wiki article isn't done?
Seems like he should, since he basically only found it by spying. I guess attacking incomplete arguments is his thing...

[brimstoneSalad]

It looks like Isaac has gone fully off the rails and become a deontological nutcase:

the_infamous.png

Obviously we don't accept that kind of reasoning for humans due to the greater consequences of violating social contract, the utility of rights agreements between human beings, and the aspect of personal risk (which is selfish and not moral in nature); All things non-human animals are not part of. For animals, it's pure moral consideration in terms of net violation of interest, which is why we can and must look at numbers of comparable instances of harm (not for lack of considering quality as well).

[DrSinger]

Do you know how to do that easily?

I could screenrecord on my phone then crop it using inshot, that'd be easy enough. If nonzerosum or Red are happy to do it properly that would be good.

edit: Got the clip. Will upload it in-line if you like

Does Ask Yourself not realize the Wiki article isn't done?
Seems like he should, since he basically only found it by spying. I guess attacking incomplete arguments is his thing...

I'm under the impression he reads all the threads relating to NTT.

AY must be driving a lot of philosophically inclined vegans to the forum, that's one silver-lining to come out of this whole thing.

[brimstoneSalad]

edit: Got the clip. Will upload it in-line if you like

Sounds great!

I'm going to work on it for a bit. I'd like to polish things up a bit and add more references before he responds to it.

[DrSinger]

I put it in as a link (I don't think you can have it playable in-line), it's low res because the max file size is 2mb.

I'd like to polish things up a bit and add more references before he responds to it.

I think it would be good to get the symbolic logic section fleshed out, I now realise why the version I put there is wrong (because ∄t∈T is taken to be a true/false statement in and of itself, I believe).

It was ill-conceived as an attempted improvement on the argument from Marginal Cases (created by philosopher Peter Singer), and is in practice combined with a hidden Categorical Imperative-like premise yielding a deontological form of argument (where Singer's original argument was consequentialist, a position Isaac rejects).

I think this could be misinterpreted to say that singer's original argument from marginal cases was consequentialist, rather than his argument for veganism as a whole

[brimstoneSalad]

I put it in as a link (I don't think you can have it playable in-line), it's low res because the max file size is 2mb.

Ah, I think I need to add an extension:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:EmbedVideo

I'll see if I can get that working. (Edit: got it working, that was pretty easy)

I think it would be good to get the symbolic logic section fleshed out, I now realise why the version I put there is wrong (because ∄t∈T is taken to be a true/false statement in and of itself, I believe).

Sounds good. If you can work on that, I'll work on getting the video working and adding more media and cleaning up the rest of the article.
I don't know when Ask Yourself will post his reply, but he's pretty lazy about this stuff and just goes through it (like he did with the other video) and then doesn't do any editing so it may only be a day or two.

I think this could be misinterpreted to say that singer's original argument from marginal cases was consequentialist, rather than his argument for veganism as a whole

You have a point. While many aspects of value are consequentialist as Singer discusses them, perhaps they don't necessarily need to be.

[brimstoneSalad]

Also, I want to add in this newest deontological revelation I snapped up above:
http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3505&p=34350#p34332

Where do you think we can we add that in?

Maybe here? http://philosophicalvegan.com/wiki/index.php/NameTheTrait#C._Issues_in_debates
Or somewhere else?

It creates quite a contradictions to his spectrum of value claims about animals.
I could also add a note in Value Spectrum, and add another section under "In practice, and with the defense of the argument" regarding his contradictions on value that the deontological aspects create.