362
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

*please note i deeply value and respect the vegan movement. i am just critical of how humorously it precipitates in online spaces, particularly this one. :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Nope. They're objectively spewing a large array of false equivalence and my personal comment was directly and logically derived from that and that only.

It was thus logically sound AKA not a fallacy.

Your comment, on the other hand, is a textbook example of a reverse causation fallacy strawman combo:

you portray my criticism of their argument as a personal criticism when in fact my subsequent personal criticism is based on the illogic of their argument and nothing else.

[-] ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

You literally asked if they were that bad at logic while offering no actual refute to what they had to say. But whatever, have a nice day

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

"Those are not at all equivalent" IS a refutation.

It's not my job to spoonfeed bigots about exactly how my dietary (lack of) choices is different from hating trans and black people while sponsoring fascism 🙄

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 months ago

If your diet includes meat, you are most likely causing the death of an animal. If you believe that killing animals is wrong, then it follows that eating meat is also wrong. As to what is more wrong versus what is less wrong, that varies from culture to culture and age to age. Perhaps they believe that killing an animal is almost as bad as killing a human. Their argument is sound; it is just based on different axioms than yours.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Their argument is sound; it is just based on different axioms than yours.

No. Their argument is based on applying their subjective beliefs that I don't share to my actions and as such by definition not sound.

It's a 1:1 equivalent of anti choice people calling abortion murder.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 months ago

No. Their argument is based on applying their subjective beliefs that I don't share to my actions and as such by definition not sound.

Do you believe that racism or sexism is wrong? Do you think a racist or sexist person would share your belief? Are you not, then, applying your subjective beliefs that they don't share to their actions?

We judge others based on our moral standards, not theirs. To someone who sees the killing of an animal as a great sin, your actions might therefore seem wrong.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Do you believe that racism or sexism is wrong?

You're acting EXACTLY like an anti choice person asking me if I think murder is wrong because I believe in a woman's right to choose 🤦

Do you think a racist or sexist person would share your belief?

Not necessarily and not necessarily not, since they're in no way related.

Are you not, then, applying your subjective beliefs that they don't share to their actions?

No. Their veganism is actively selected by them based on their subjective beliefs about animals being basically human.

My lack of veganism is not based in ideology.

I don't eat grains based on the belief that insects are worth less than other animals. I eat grains to be sated, for their nutritional value, and for their taste.

Exactly the same reason why I sometimes eat meat.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago

No. Their veganism is actively selected by them based on their subjective beliefs about animals being basically human.

Or maybe a general opposition to violence, or a concern for the ecological impact of domestic animals, or a fear that it could cause the next pandemic.

My lack of veganism is not based in ideology.

This is a weak argument. Based on your abortion example, I'm guessing you are from the US or southern Europe. So, you might know of the Confederate States of America and/or Fascist Iberia / Italy. In those places, were there not people who did not consciously support slavery / fascism, but went along with it because they 'did not have an ideology'? How would you judge them?

Further, on your not having an ideology, do you support the eating of humans? Monkeys? Cats? Dogs? Which animals are haram to you, and which ones are halal?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Ok, that's it. You have officially crossed the line from a zealot spewing increasingly false equivalences to saying that everyone who doesn't agree with you is equivalent to slave owners and fascists.

I'm done indulging your self-righteous hallucinations. Have the day you deserve.

PS: No, I'm not from the US or southern Europe. I chose the abortion example because of complete topical symmetry, not because it's a hot topic here in Denmark. It hasn't been since the 1970s.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago

I'm not vegan, although I agree with most of their arguments, so I can't be self-righteous about it.

saying that everyone who doesn't agree with you is equivalent to slave owners and fascists.

Since English is not your first language, I apologise if my wording was confusing. My point was that accepting whatever is seen as normal, or refusing to make a choice, is itself an action, one that says that you agree with your society's ideology.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I said have the day you deserve. I'm done with your Dunning Kruger poster boy nonsense.

this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
362 points (100.0% liked)

196

16501 readers
2937 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS