Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.
In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
Nothing wrong with this on the face of it - you could easily answer yes or no without having to accept anything substantial. You'd just explain what you think 'diversity of opinion' looks like afterwards.
Again, fine on its own. In context this might be a red herring if the main topic isn't about whether someone is entitled to their opinion or not.
Yes, this does imply that you changed your mind about something recently. However, it doesn't come across as malicious to me, since there's no "accusation", just a suggestion. You could say "nothing as of late", and it wouldn't come across as incriminating.
|
answered on Thursday, Feb 10, 2022 06:01:54 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
|
Taken for what the ask, I agree with Shawn that these questions could approach ad hominem (abusive) in that some of them may be intended to attack the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. Rationalissimus' observations address what the questions say literally and hit the mark. Beyond those comments, I was caught by what the questions DON'T say – what they could be taken to imply. While none of the questions rises to the point of "Have you stopped beating your dog?", some of them could carry negative implications that could take the argument away from its intended path. Well don’t you think we need diversity of opinion? One answer could be, "No, diversity of opinion is bad is we don't need it."; another could be, "Yes, diversity of opinion is good, so we need to work to achieve it."; another could be, "Yes, diversity of opinion is good and that's why we put together such a diverse group in the first place to deal with the issue." If the third response is the one that actually relates to the situation, then asking the question could be a disingenuous attempt at implying diversity isn't already at play. Similarly, Don’t you think I’m entailed to my opinion? could be an attempt to imply that the argument is only opinion-based, rather than fact-based. What is something you changed your mind about recently? could be taken to imply that the person refuses to accept alternate opinions, even when mind-changing evidence is presented – something not related to the point of discussion but to the individual's reticence to accepting alternate conclusions. |
answered on Thursday, Feb 10, 2022 10:17:25 AM by Arlo | |
Arlo Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
|
"I'm Entitled To My Opinion" is a recognized fallacy since it's a way of asserting a conclusion without actually supporting it with arguments. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%2. . . |
answered on Thursday, Feb 10, 2022 10:38:02 AM by Ed F | |
Ed F Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|