Degrees of Cruelty

"ta" <ta33.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:vF%_c.106913$%n4.43790@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> ta wrote:
>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>>
>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>
> I should have mentioned the motive in all instances is the sick pleasure
> of
> the torturer (i.e., the torture is an end in itself).

On one level they are all equal, it is reprehensible to use pain as a form
of entertainment. On another level they rank b-a-d-c-e-f.
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"ta" <ta33 RemoveThis @bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:eD%_c.106908$%n4.7386@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>
> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>
>

Why torture at all, I have noted that you place questions to the group,
leave us to argue the toss and then come back with your own response.
Give us your response first.
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"ta" <ta33.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:eD%_c.106908$%n4.7386@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>
> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.

Subjectively:

b, a, d,

c and e are equal

f

They're all despicable though, and while I may find it more upsetting
personally if I know the baby, snake, or dog being tortured, objectively
it's morally equivalent whether I'm the parent/owner or not.

More objectively then:

a and b the same

c, d, and e the same

f

-Rubystars
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"Gluteus Maximus" <legion.DeleteThis@ceaserus.com> wrote in message
news:ae3pj0pgbm1s0pccag3jph9qh0obrrjaca@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 12:02:04 -0400, "ta" <ta33.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
> >
> >a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
> >b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
> >c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
> >d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
> >e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
> >f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
> >
>
> FatNash has done all of them and in no particular order. Like most
> ProHunt kooks he is not fussed.

Is ta Nash?

-Rubystars
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

Dutch wrote:
> "ta" <ta33 DeleteThis @bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:vF%_c.106913$%n4.43790@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> ta wrote:
>>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>>>
>>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>>
>> I should have mentioned the motive in all instances is the sick
>> pleasure of
>> the torturer (i.e., the torture is an end in itself).
>
> On one level they are all equal, it is reprehensible to use pain as a
> form of entertainment.

What levels are you referring to?

> On another level they rank b-a-d-c-e-f.

What is your rationale? (I agree with your ranking, btw).
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"ta" <ta33 RemoveThis @bellsouth.net> wrote
> Dutch wrote:
>> "ta" <ta33 RemoveThis @bellsouth.net> wrote
>>> ta wrote:
>>>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>>>>
>>>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>>>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>>>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>>>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>>>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>>>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>>>
>>> I should have mentioned the motive in all instances is the sick
>>> pleasure of
>>> the torturer (i.e., the torture is an end in itself).
>>
>> On one level they are all equal, it is reprehensible to use pain as a
>> form of entertainment.
>
> What levels are you referring to?

On the level of strictly judging the appropriateness of the motivation of
the actor, that being deriving entertainment by causing another's suffering,
sadism. It's all offensive.

>> On another level they rank b-a-d-c-e-f.
>
> What is your rationale? (I agree with your ranking, btw).

The species are ranked in order of their apparent sentience and their
closeness to me personally to determine how much their pain distresses me.
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

Rubystars wrote:
> "ta" <ta33.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:eD%_c.106908$%n4.7386@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>>
>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>
> Subjectively:

Well, the question is phrased in subjective terms, so that's what I would
expect.

> b, a, d,
>
> c and e are equal
>
> f
>
> They're all despicable though, and while I may find it more upsetting
> personally if I know the baby, snake, or dog being tortured,
> objectively it's morally equivalent whether I'm the parent/owner or
> not.
>
> More objectively then:

How can one "objectively" decide that one thing is more upsetting/offensive
than another, just out of curiousity.

> a and b the same
>
> c, d, and e the same
>
> f
>
> -Rubystars
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"ta" <ta33.TakeThisOut@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
<snip>
> How can one "objectively" decide that one thing is more
upsetting/offensive
> than another, just out of curiousity.

I meant as far as being morally wrong, it's no more wrong for a person to
kill my baby/beloved pet than it is to kill someone else's baby/beloved pet,
even though it would hurt me a lot more personally if it were mine.

-Rubystars
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"ta" <ta33 RemoveThis @bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<Nsu%c.92925$0o5.52625@bignews1.bellsouth.net>...
> Dutch wrote:
> > "ta" <ta33 RemoveThis @bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:vF%_c.106913$%n4.43790@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> >> ta wrote:
> >>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
> >>>
> >>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
> >>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
> >>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
> >>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
> >>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
> >>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
> >>
> >> I should have mentioned the motive in all instances is the sick
> >> pleasure of
> >> the torturer (i.e., the torture is an end in itself).
> >
> > On one level they are all equal, it is reprehensible to use pain as a
> > form of entertainment.
>
> What levels are you referring to?
>
> > On another level they rank b-a-d-c-e-f.
>
> What is your rationale? (I agree with your ranking, btw).

On what level does that ranking make sense? If ranked by the reprehensibility
of the motive they are all equal, if ranked by the amount of harm they
do then a/b are equivalent c/d are equivalent, all 4 are probably worse than
e, which is in turn probably worse than f. If ranked by the amount of distress
they would cause me personally then they rank b-d-a/c(equal)-e-f.
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

"Purple" <purple2510.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9e034035.0409081030.74d52530@posting.google.com...
> "ta" <ta33.TakeThisOut@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:<Nsu%c.92925$0o5.52625@bignews1.bellsouth.net>...
>> Dutch wrote:
>> > "ta" <ta33.TakeThisOut@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> > news:vF%_c.106913$%n4.43790@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> >> ta wrote:
>> >>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>> >>>
>> >>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>> >>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>> >>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>> >>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>> >>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>> >>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>> >>
>> >> I should have mentioned the motive in all instances is the sick
>> >> pleasure of
>> >> the torturer (i.e., the torture is an end in itself).
>> >
>> > On one level they are all equal, it is reprehensible to use pain as a
>> > form of entertainment.
>>
>> What levels are you referring to?
>>
>> > On another level they rank b-a-d-c-e-f.
>>
>> What is your rationale? (I agree with your ranking, btw).
>
> On what level does that ranking make sense?

It makes sense if you are more disturbed by the torture of *any* 6 month old
baby than you are by the torture of your own 6 month old puppy. I can
understand seeing it either way.

> If ranked by the reprehensibility
> of the motive they are all equal,

Agreed

> if ranked by the amount of harm they
> do then a/b are equivalent c/d are equivalent,
> all 4 are probably worse than
> e, which is in turn probably worse than f.

What is your objective measure of harm? I don't know that we can say with
any assurance that a baby feels pain more acutely than a snake.

> If ranked by the amount of distress
> they would cause me personally then they rank b-d-a/c(equal)-e-f.

You would be equally upset to hear about someone who tortures puppies as you
would about someone who tortures babies?
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 12:02:04 -0400, "ta" <ta33 DeleteThis @bellsouth.net> wrote:

>Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>
>a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.

How about the slow deaths of many poisoned wild animals
in crop fields, compared to the swift deaths of livestock in
slaughterhouses?
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

<dh_ld.RemoveThis@nomail.com> wrote
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 12:02:04 -0400, "ta" <ta33.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>>
>>a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>>b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>>c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>>d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>>e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>>f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>
> How about the slow deaths of many poisoned wild animals
> in crop fields, compared to the swift deaths of livestock in
> slaughterhouses?

Off topic, not the point, start your own thread.
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty 

Dutch wrote:
> "ta" <ta33.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote
>> Dutch wrote:
>>> "ta" <ta33.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote
>>>> ta wrote:
>>>>> Rank these in the order you find most upsetting/offensive:
>>>>>
>>>>> a. The torturing of a 6-month old baby.
>>>>> b. The torturing of * your* 6-month old baby.
>>>>> c. The torturing of a 6-month old dog.
>>>>> d. The torturing of *your* 6-month old dog.
>>>>> e. The torturing of a 6-month old snake.
>>>>> f. The torturing of a 6-month old cricket.
>>>>
>>>> I should have mentioned the motive in all instances is the sick
>>>> pleasure of
>>>> the torturer (i.e., the torture is an end in itself).
>>>
>>> On one level they are all equal, it is reprehensible to use pain as
>>> a form of entertainment.
>>
>> What levels are you referring to?
>
> On the level of strictly judging the appropriateness of the
> motivation of the actor, that being deriving entertainment by causing
> another's suffering, sadism. It's all offensive.

I agree, it is all offensive. What is noteworthy imo, however, is that they
are not all equally offensive to 99.9 percent of us. Simply put, not all
cruelty is created equally.

>>> On another level they rank b-a-d-c-e-f.
>>
>> What is your rationale? (I agree with your ranking, btw).
>
> The species are ranked in order of their apparent sentience and their
> closeness to me personally to determine how much their pain
> distresses me.

Fair enough, and I'd go a step further and say that we human beings in
general naturally tend to identify with those who are most like us. To see
another human suffer is more offensive to us because we obviously understand
and identify more strongly with other humans than with dogs or crickets or
cows. The less the creature is like us, the less we can identify. That's not
to say that one form is more acceptable than the other, but we shouldn't be
so shocked that not every human being is up in arms about rats being
tortured. If rats could talk like we humans, the level of outrage would
surely increase dramatically.
 >> Stay informed about: Degrees of Cruelty