75% of the anti-piracy discussions I see rarely blame companies like Nintendo or Disney and always try to talk about how piracy is immoral, and you should feel “dirty” for doing it. My question is why do people seem to hate those who pirate more than the bad practices of mega-corporations or the fact that they don’t want to preserve their media?

  • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    they have the exact same capacity as me to understand why veganism is a moral obligation.

    This is a “begging the question” logical fallacy

    this is an ad hominem and, as I stated, a thought-terminating cliché.

    veganism is a moral obligation

    carnism comes with victims

    is it just cope?

    What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another? You’re projecting here.

    I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

    • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I have no issues with someone not supporting animal torture, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

      There is no functional difference between your original text and my bolded replacement. To be a carnist is to, through your actions, support animal torture.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Hmm. Claims to not support animal torture yet joins hexbear and tortures all of us mammals on Lemmy any time one of you “writes” a comment. I’m seeing a disconnect in your reasoning here…

        • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          This is such a shitty “joke”. Fucking hell. I hope you experience even half of the suffering a dairy cow experiences during their life. You won’t, because the world isn’t fair, but if I could imprison you and exploit your reproductive system until you’re too old and worn out to be worthwhile and then kill you, I would do so.

    • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      This is a “begging the question” logical fallacy

      How is asserting “It doesn’t seem morally superior to hold others to the exact same moral standard as me” circular reasoning? Explain in detail; don’t just say it like it’s obvious and a “no shit” kind of take.

      What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another? You’re projecting here.

      You are disingenuously undermining what veganism is by phrasing it as a trivial dietary choice. And once again, this isn’t about whether vegans are “morally superior” or not. You can engage in ideas without using such an ad hominem as a cushion for your own guilt, but you are still actually refusing to do so. There is no reason why veganism, as a subject, should get an automatic quick dismissal via accusations of a “superiority complex” than any other subject. For instance, I take it and hope that you wouldn’t say “anti-racists think they’re so superior to racists 🙄,” but doing so holds the exact same amount of weight as what you’re doing right now with veganism. You’re using a thought-terminating cliché to degrade the person asserting an idea rather than discussing the idea itself.

      I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

      There is a reason why I said “veganism isn’t about me.” You are committing victim erasure by glossing over the fact that I made very clear that veganism is a justice movement that takes a stand for victims. And once again, you are just repeating the same exact issue of ad hominem and a thought-terminating cliché by calling vegans “self-righteous” and disingenuously strawmanning them as people who just want to circlejerk about the “superiority of their choices” rather than engage in and advocate for a justice movement.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        Explain in detail; don’t just say it like it’s obvious and a “no shit” kind of take.

        Your entire argument is based on the assumption that your morals are the “correct morals” while everyone else who doesn’t align with you is incorrect. That’s a textbook definition of this fallacy.

        You are disingenuously undermining what veganism is by phrasing it as a trivial dietary choice.

        That’s exactly what it is. Disagree? Explain in detail; don’t just say it like it’s obvious and a “no shit” kind of take.

        There is no reason why veganism, as a subject, should get an automatic quick dismissal via accusations of a “superiority complex” than any other subject.

        Where has that happened here? I challenge you to quote the comment stating as much. Seems like you’re strawmanning here.

        I said “veganism isn’t about me.”

        you are just repeating the same exact issue of ad hominem and a thought-terminating cliché by calling vegans “self-righteous” and disingenuously strawmanning them as people who just want to circlejerk about the “superiority of their choices”

        “Veganism isn’t about me, but if you criticize me personally, you’re criticizing veganism!”

        This is hilariously illogical. It reads like someone whose brain is short circuiting from all the cognitive dissonance.

        • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          Your entire argument is based on the assumption that your morals are the “correct morals” while everyone else who doesn’t align with you is incorrect. That’s a textbook definition of this fallacy.

          No, “begging the question” refers to circular logic. What you’re stating is actually called a belief in moral realism, which is a different subject altogether. How are you going to throw out an accusation of a fallacy so damn smugly and then proceed to say that I engaged in a textbook example of the fallacy when you clearly struggle to even know what said fallacy means?

          Furthermore, if you’re appealing to moral relativism, you could easily reductio this to some absurd conclusions, like saying “My personal morals justify SA, so stop thinking you’re superior for opposing SA!”

          That’s exactly what it is. Disagree? Explain in detail; don’t just say it like it’s obvious and a “no shit” kind of take.

          That’s not what veganism is. Veganism is a deontic stance against animal exploitation, and this is common knowledge for many people, even if not for an overwhelming majority of carnists. Not going to zoos, not wearing leather, boycotting the pet industry, and abstaining from riding horses have nothing to do with diet, but they are still aspects of a vegan lifestyle. Acknowledging these things, however, would come with a more explicitly ethical consideration, so you avoid such an acknowledgement because you’re unable to narrow these things down to this trivial dietary choice you’re framing veganism as.

          Where has that happened here? I challenge you to quote the comment stating as much. Seems like you’re strawmanning here.

          None of your comments discuss veganism in the context of it being a philosophy and a principle, but every single one of your comments have tried to drive home this ad hominem.

          Examples:

          And here’s that exact superiority complex on display for all to see.

          What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another?

          I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

          “Veganism isn’t about me, but if you criticize me personally, you’re criticizing veganism!”

          What is nuance? You are criticizing vegans for advocating for the victims of their movement, which is a criticism of veganism in and of itself, even if you do not realize this and do the pseudo-respectful, “I don’t mind you being vegan as long as you don’t push your lifestyle onto other people!” You clearly don’t agree with veganism ethically because you support animal exploitation and slaughter, so my point is that, instead of actually trying to argue a case for why veganism is ethically incorrect, instead, you decided to just adhere to the classic ad hominem tactic that carnists abuse the shit out of all the time. Also, you have a very one-dimensional, myopic way of thinking. Even in cases where a justice movement isn’t about the supporters of a movement itself, insulting the supporters of that movement still comes with the negative connotation of undermining the validity of the movement. For instance, if you insulted a male feminist, a cishet ally of the LGBTQ+ community, and a white advocate for racial justice for being “pushy” about their beliefs, you are giving away an indication that you disagree with the advocacy of their respective movements on some level.

          This is hilariously illogical. It reads like someone whose brain is short circuiting from all the cognitive dissonance.

          This is hilariously ironic. It’s starting to read like parody even!