Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa
I keep handing out rights to animals because I believe they have them.
|
On what basis? I've exhaustively explained why I don't think that they have rights, but so far all I've seen on the other side is bare assertions. Why don't you explain your theory of why animals have rights, instead of just asserting that they do?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa
Your problem with all of this is you state your philosophy as fact. I don't know if you have read Roger Scruton but you are using his exact arguments.
|
Please point to where I've said "this is fact" anywhere at all in this discussion. All I've done is show my premises, explain my reasoning, and detail my conclusions, and the only place where I've said you were factually wrong is where you incorrectly claimed that humans don't necessarily need to kill animals to live, which point you didn't address at all other than to make some entirely tangential observation about philosophers.
As far as Roger Scruton goes, I've never heard of him but I will have a look and see what he has to say and perhaps some criticisms of his logic as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa
There are reasons these people are called philosophers. Because they all have a different philosophy of life. I understand you believe in this "theory" however it isn't fact, others are allowed to disagree with you.
|
Where did I say people couldn't disagree with me? Oh yah, nowhere. I have no problem with disagreement, but valid opinions are based on solid premises and logical conclusions, not self-contradictions. As I said, why don't you explain why animals should have rights and what theory of rights this is based upon, so that I can evaluate whether or not you have a well-supported position or are just piling ad-hoc arguments on top of each other?