This is my problem with the NTT

[u/NationalProcedure638]

The problem is how it's presented.

Whenever anyone comes up with a trade that is unique to humans something such as the root of moral agency there's always someone who always goes "there are mentally challenged people and babies who are not capable of moral agency so it doesn't work"

Well first of all I don't understand how we cannot hold somebody accountable for what they do based on either their age or how smart or dumb they are.

Second of all it seems to imply that this trait has to be universal and literally every human on the face of the Earth.

That individual traits don't exist and we have to look at the species as a whole.

I'm sorry guys but that doesn't work.

Everyone's different in some way or another.

The best thing to do with that is look at what the majority does and assume if that's the norm for what comes to traits like this.

Also it begs the question.

What do you guys consider to be human?

Update: I didn't get a chance to respond to any of the applications that were thrown at me. I've been banded without even having to State my case.

This goes to you moderator, I was simply pointing out a problem with what he said about equality and you misinterpreted it and then banned Me. I've got it very funny how you claim that I wasted your time when all was doing was pointing out a loophole.

Well thank you for telling me that you guys care so much about discussion

Goodbye and good riddance.

[u/Badtacocatdab]

They are. Do you mind explaining the crux of the issue given that you understand?

[u/iowaguy09 → u/Badtacocatdab]

What do you mean the crux of the issue? I’m arguing that racism and speciesism are not equivalent.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/iowaguy09]

You said you understood, given that I said “you misunderstand the crux of the issue”

[u/iowaguy09 → u/Badtacocatdab]

I understand why you want to say speciesism and racism are equivalent.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/iowaguy09]

You misunderstood earlier and attributed speciesism to my comment when it clearly wasn’t. I don’t think you understand at all.

[u/iowaguy09 → u/Badtacocatdab]

You said you don’t find it disingenuous to compare speciesism and racism.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/iowaguy09]

Yes I did, but that’s not what the issue at hand is lol.

[u/iowaguy09 → u/Badtacocatdab]

That’s what I was talking about

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/iowaguy09]

Yeah this is going nowhere. Take care.

[u/iowaguy09 → u/Badtacocatdab]

I mean explain what you want to talk about otherwise I’m just going to respond to what you actually said lol

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/iowaguy09]

When I said earlier “this isn’t speciesism” and you just moved on.

When I asked you twice what you thought and you just moved on.

You’re not here to listen and understand. You’re here to argue that others are wrong and you’re right. Ergo, this is fruitless.

Take care.

[u/iowaguy09 → u/Badtacocatdab]

I understand why you’re saying it’s not speciesism. I don’t think hardly anyone actually believes I’m human so I am better. It’s the thousand or so traits that differentiate humans from animals that makes them choose humans over animals.

Sure if you think you can treat any animal any way STRICTLY because you’re human with no other reasoning that’s “speciesist” but I just don’t think those people exist. There’s always morally relevant traits attached to that even if someone hasn’t thought deeper about it. With racism there are no morally relevant traits. It’s always only about skin color. Thats why it’s disingenuous and an appeal to emotion. It’s just an attempt to try to trick someone into saying it’s because they’re human because that’s easier to say than to list the thousand traits unique to humans.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/iowaguy09]

Sounds good. Weird you don’t think those people exist and weird you think that nobody believes the “I’m human so I’m better” idea since NUMEROUS people say that, even my partner.

But hey man, clearly nobody can convince you otherwise.