Why can't I kill cats?

demonlkojipub19_ESO

Royalroacho wrote: »

I guess I agree with both sides of this to varying degrees. In the interest of making everyone happy, I think all combat and violence should be removed. It will be replaced with a dialogue system, and we'll talk out our differences with a lengthy menu of conversational options. Just wait till you see the difficulty level of arguments with the undead! Those guys are totally unreasonable.

http://ffxiv.gamerescape.com/wiki/Zombies_Are_People_Too

Raash

you are confusing your points. You are saying on one hand that animals are factually inferior to humans, and on another hand that they are treated as such and that that will eventually improve. I am saying that animals are not factually inferior to humans regardless of societal perception or treatment, the same as any human. Just because society treats an individual, human or animal, as inferior, as property, as a tool for their amusement, whatever, does not mean that creature is in fact inferior. It means they are under the yoke of an oppressor. The oppressor is not in the right just because he happens to be in a society that approves of or condones his actions.

If you call me a dog your intent is to be insulting. So I will take it as an insult. There are situations in which you could call me a dog, and it would not be insulting. As with all things it is relative to context. We use dog or b-tch as a derogatory term, therefore, it is irrelevant whether I actually percieve dogs as inferior or "bad".

No, i think ive been pretty straight forward with what I think and believe in on a personal level and how the IRL world deals with animals and humans are equals or not.
I say that they are not equal and probably never will be. And that thats how the world works regardless of individuals as you or myself might think otherwise in our daily lives, unless of coarse the big miracle happens and majority of world population will start look at animals with other eyes other then as of food, tools or amusement.
You keep drawing this to a personal level referring to what seems to be a big thing for you, how I "perceive" things. There are numbers of religions/stand points/free thinkers out there wich provide different views and aspects on the matter. Wich beliefs is the true and right ones? Yours? Mine?
There is a pretty big difference between how an individual see something and how the general public in the world does.

And about the dog thing, it is my firm belief that people wouldnt be offended by something he/she see as equal to ones self, regardless of the intended way.
"You [snip] equal!", right?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

aipex8_ESO

What it all boils down to, is that abuse and violence against animals (I'm talking pet animals like cats and dogs) is a real world thing, just like abuse and violence against children is a real world thing. Many people are very sensitive to these issues because they deal with them in real life (I not only have rescued/adopted 4 cats, but also donate time and money to helping animals). Depicting these scenarios in a game or movie is going to be controversial, not wrong, but it's going to give the game or movie a darker tone for sure and will turn many off because it may hit too close to home. ZOS isn't looking to make a dark/controversial game so they aren't going to have killable children or pets. You may not have experience with child abuse or animal cruelty, so you don't see it as a big deal, but others will.

Araflin

I'd almost agree with you @aipex8_ESO if it wasn't for the fact some people have pet rats and frogs. Yet they are fair targets in game.

Ed: Typo

Royalroacho

I just noticed you cant kill the birds, either. Some smartass parrot was giving me the stink eye near the wayshrine. I tried to wipe his smarmy bird grin off his face with my axe, but it just passed through him.

Raash

aipex8_ESO wrote: »

What it all boils down to, is that abuse and violence against animals (I'm talking pet animals like cats and dogs) is a real world thing, just like abuse and violence against children is a real world thing. Many people are very sensitive to these issues because they deal with them in real life (I not only have rescued/adopted 4 cats, but also donate time and money to helping animals). Depicting these scenarios in a game or movie is going to be controversial, not wrong, but it's going to give the game or movie a darker tone for sure and will turn many off because it may hit too close to home. ZOS isn't looking to make a dark/controversial game so they aren't going to have killable children or pets. You may not have experience with child abuse or animal cruelty, so you don't see it as a big deal, but others will.

I can settle with that, still a shame tho D

aipex8_ESO

Araflin wrote: »

I'd almost agree with you @aipex8_ESO if it wasn't for the fact some people have pet rats and frogs. Yet they are fair targets in game.

Ed: Typo

I agree that emotional issues like this aren't always logical. Real life frogs and rats can be pets, but more often than not they are seen as pests (especially in the wild). Cats and dogs basically domesticated themselves thousands of years ago and are pretty much exclusively pets now, and humans have grown to think of them as part of the family because of this. I totally understand that to think about this logically doesn't make sense. Why is a cat's safety any more important than an opossum or skunk or any other animal of similar size and intelligence? It's based on emotion, and isn't always logical, but that doesn't change the fact that it's how most people feel.

Raash

aipex8_ESO wrote: »

Araflin wrote: »

I'd almost agree with you @aipex8_ESO if it wasn't for the fact some people have pet rats and frogs. Yet they are fair targets in game.

Ed: Typo

I agree that emotional issues like this aren't always logical. Real life frogs and rats can be pets, but more often than not they are seen as pests (especially in the wild). Cats and dogs basically domesticated themselves thousands of years ago and are pretty much exclusively pets now, and humans have grown to think of them as part of the family because of this. I totally understand that to think about this logically doesn't make sense. Why is a cat's safety any more important than an opossum or skunk or any other animal of similar size and intelligence? It's based on emotion, and isn't always logical, but that doesn't change the fact that it's how most people feel.

Speaking about something completely different - I like the way you express yourself in text, pretty clean and easy to understand even for non native english people like myself that struggles at times with understanding fancy words. you even have just about perfect lenght at your sentences wich makes my eyes breeze through it with ease. While i dont necessarily agree with what you type i just wanted to give you that anyway.
I am more of a barbarian when it comes to writing english sadly enough lol!

aipex8_ESO

Raash wrote: »

aipex8_ESO wrote: »

Araflin wrote: »

I'd almost agree with you @aipex8_ESO if it wasn't for the fact some people have pet rats and frogs. Yet they are fair targets in game.

Ed: Typo

I agree that emotional issues like this aren't always logical. Real life frogs and rats can be pets, but more often than not they are seen as pests (especially in the wild). Cats and dogs basically domesticated themselves thousands of years ago and are pretty much exclusively pets now, and humans have grown to think of them as part of the family because of this. I totally understand that to think about this logically doesn't make sense. Why is a cat's safety any more important than an opossum or skunk or any other animal of similar size and intelligence? It's based on emotion, and isn't always logical, but that doesn't change the fact that it's how most people feel.

Speaking about something completely different - I like the way you express yourself in text, pretty clean and easy to understand even for non native english people like myself that struggles at times with understanding fancy words. you even have just about perfect lenght at your sentences wich makes my eyes breeze through it with ease. While i dont necessarily agree with what you type i just wanted to give you that anyway.
I am more of a barbarian when it comes to writing english sadly enough lol!

Thanks! And I'm quite enjoying having a little debate with you as you are polite and respect other's point of view without turning it into a flame war as usually happens on the internet! Bro-hug!

Royalroacho

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

AlexDougherty

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Araflin wrote: »

Because I feel it is a separate issue so go start your own thread about it if you like. I think it detracts from the aim of the thread. So, once again, for the hard of reading, please desist.

but it is relevant to me because I don't want cats to be killable unless there are killable children. It's a package deal.

Then you get neither.

Killing children, even pretend children, is not ok, it's not healthy, and it is not happening.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Royalroacho wrote: »

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

you do not believe people with special needs are equal?

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Raash wrote: »

you are confusing your points. You are saying on one hand that animals are factually inferior to humans, and on another hand that they are treated as such and that that will eventually improve. I am saying that animals are not factually inferior to humans regardless of societal perception or treatment, the same as any human. Just because society treats an individual, human or animal, as inferior, as property, as a tool for their amusement, whatever, does not mean that creature is in fact inferior. It means they are under the yoke of an oppressor. The oppressor is not in the right just because he happens to be in a society that approves of or condones his actions.

If you call me a dog your intent is to be insulting. So I will take it as an insult. There are situations in which you could call me a dog, and it would not be insulting. As with all things it is relative to context. We use dog or b-tch as a derogatory term, therefore, it is irrelevant whether I actually percieve dogs as inferior or "bad".

No, i think ive been pretty straight forward with what I think and believe in on a personal level and how the IRL world deals with animals and humans are equals or not.
I say that they are not equal and probably never will be. And that thats how the world works regardless of individuals as you or myself might think otherwise in our daily lives, unless of coarse the big miracle happens and majority of world population will start look at animals with other eyes other then as of food, tools or amusement.
You keep drawing this to a personal level referring to what seems to be a big thing for you, how I "perceive" things. There are numbers of religions/stand points/free thinkers out there wich provide different views and aspects on the matter. Wich beliefs is the true and right ones? Yours? Mine?
There is a pretty big difference between how an individual see something and how the general public in the world does.

And about the dog thing, it is my firm belief that people wouldnt be offended by something he/she see as equal to ones self, regardless of the intended way.
"You [snip] equal!", right?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

I'm curious what the curseword was.

You are arguing two different points.

1) animals are fundamentally unequal to humans. they are inferior. As an opinion or fact.

2) animals will always be treated as unequals to humans regardless of whether or not they should be considered unequal.

You use #2 a lot but I am not arguing against #2, I am arguing against #1. What society does and perceives as a whole is irrelevant to this. Society does many bad things and perceives many things incorrectly. That does not mean they are true or that we should all follow this thought pattern.

Furthermore, if you can't perceive how context changes the meaning of a word, I don't know what to tell you. It's part and parcel of the English language.

AlexDougherty

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

you are confusing your points. You are saying on one hand that animals are factually inferior to humans, and on another hand that they are treated as such and that that will eventually improve. I am saying that animals are not factually inferior to humans regardless of societal perception or treatment, the same as any human. Just because society treats an individual, human or animal, as inferior, as property, as a tool for their amusement, whatever, does not mean that creature is in fact inferior. It means they are under the yoke of an oppressor. The oppressor is not in the right just because he happens to be in a society that approves of or condones his actions.

If you call me a dog your intent is to be insulting. So I will take it as an insult. There are situations in which you could call me a dog, and it would not be insulting. As with all things it is relative to context. We use dog or b-tch as a derogatory term, therefore, it is irrelevant whether I actually percieve dogs as inferior or "bad".

No, i think ive been pretty straight forward with what I think and believe in on a personal level and how the IRL world deals with animals and humans are equals or not.
I say that they are not equal and probably never will be. And that thats how the world works regardless of individuals as you or myself might think otherwise in our daily lives, unless of coarse the big miracle happens and majority of world population will start look at animals with other eyes other then as of food, tools or amusement.
You keep drawing this to a personal level referring to what seems to be a big thing for you, how I "perceive" things. There are numbers of religions/stand points/free thinkers out there wich provide different views and aspects on the matter. Wich beliefs is the true and right ones? Yours? Mine?
There is a pretty big difference between how an individual see something and how the general public in the world does.

And about the dog thing, it is my firm belief that people wouldnt be offended by something he/she see as equal to ones self, regardless of the intended way.
"You [snip] equal!", right?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

I'm curious what the curseword was.

You are arguing two different points.

1) animals are fundamentally unequal to humans. they are inferior. As an opinion or fact.

Animals are fundamentally inferior to humans, name one animal species other than humans which builds cities, or vehicles, or medicine.

Until they can do that, without being trained by humans (other members of the same species is ok though), they will never be our equals.

<cut to avoid politics>

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

AlexDougherty wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

you are confusing your points. You are saying on one hand that animals are factually inferior to humans, and on another hand that they are treated as such and that that will eventually improve. I am saying that animals are not factually inferior to humans regardless of societal perception or treatment, the same as any human. Just because society treats an individual, human or animal, as inferior, as property, as a tool for their amusement, whatever, does not mean that creature is in fact inferior. It means they are under the yoke of an oppressor. The oppressor is not in the right just because he happens to be in a society that approves of or condones his actions.

If you call me a dog your intent is to be insulting. So I will take it as an insult. There are situations in which you could call me a dog, and it would not be insulting. As with all things it is relative to context. We use dog or b-tch as a derogatory term, therefore, it is irrelevant whether I actually percieve dogs as inferior or "bad".

No, i think ive been pretty straight forward with what I think and believe in on a personal level and how the IRL world deals with animals and humans are equals or not.
I say that they are not equal and probably never will be. And that thats how the world works regardless of individuals as you or myself might think otherwise in our daily lives, unless of coarse the big miracle happens and majority of world population will start look at animals with other eyes other then as of food, tools or amusement.
You keep drawing this to a personal level referring to what seems to be a big thing for you, how I "perceive" things. There are numbers of religions/stand points/free thinkers out there wich provide different views and aspects on the matter. Wich beliefs is the true and right ones? Yours? Mine?
There is a pretty big difference between how an individual see something and how the general public in the world does.

And about the dog thing, it is my firm belief that people wouldnt be offended by something he/she see as equal to ones self, regardless of the intended way.
"You [snip] equal!", right?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

I'm curious what the curseword was.

You are arguing two different points.

1) animals are fundamentally unequal to humans. they are inferior. As an opinion or fact.

Animals are fundamentally inferior to humans, name one animal species other than humans which builds cities, or vehicles, or medicine.

Until they can do that, without being trained by humans (other members of the same species is ok though), they will never be our equals.

<cut to avoid politics>

why does that make them inferior? All I see is a lot of environmental damage and murdering each other for power. I think your gauge of worth is different from mine.

Is a human's intellect or capacity to learn a measure of their value then? Are people who are less capable inferior as such?

Raash

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

you are confusing your points. You are saying on one hand that animals are factually inferior to humans, and on another hand that they are treated as such and that that will eventually improve. I am saying that animals are not factually inferior to humans regardless of societal perception or treatment, the same as any human. Just because society treats an individual, human or animal, as inferior, as property, as a tool for their amusement, whatever, does not mean that creature is in fact inferior. It means they are under the yoke of an oppressor. The oppressor is not in the right just because he happens to be in a society that approves of or condones his actions.

If you call me a dog your intent is to be insulting. So I will take it as an insult. There are situations in which you could call me a dog, and it would not be insulting. As with all things it is relative to context. We use dog or b-tch as a derogatory term, therefore, it is irrelevant whether I actually percieve dogs as inferior or "bad".

No, i think ive been pretty straight forward with what I think and believe in on a personal level and how the IRL world deals with animals and humans are equals or not.
I say that they are not equal and probably never will be. And that thats how the world works regardless of individuals as you or myself might think otherwise in our daily lives, unless of coarse the big miracle happens and majority of world population will start look at animals with other eyes other then as of food, tools or amusement.
You keep drawing this to a personal level referring to what seems to be a big thing for you, how I "perceive" things. There are numbers of religions/stand points/free thinkers out there wich provide different views and aspects on the matter. Wich beliefs is the true and right ones? Yours? Mine?
There is a pretty big difference between how an individual see something and how the general public in the world does.

And about the dog thing, it is my firm belief that people wouldnt be offended by something he/she see as equal to ones self, regardless of the intended way.
"You [snip] equal!", right?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

I'm curious what the curseword was.

You are arguing two different points.

1) animals are fundamentally unequal to humans. they are inferior. As an opinion or fact.

2) animals will always be treated as unequals to humans regardless of whether or not they should be considered unequal.

You use #2 a lot but I am not arguing against #2, I am arguing against #1. What society does and perceives as a whole is irrelevant to this. Society does many bad things and perceives many things incorrectly. That does not mean they are true or that we should all follow this thought pattern.

Furthermore, if you can't perceive how context changes the meaning of a word, I don't know what to tell you. It's part and parcel of the English language.

ok. thank you for pointing it out. then i would say i label it as a fact then. They are fundamentally unequal to humans.

the word: start with F and ends with a g, 7 letters.

Royalroacho

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

you do not believe people with special needs are equal?

No, I didn't mean for it to come across that way at all. As fellow living beings, I think we're all equal and should treat eachother with respect. Animals, people, possibly plants. The "special needs" comment might have been in poor taste. I've had this debate in real life, and usually people on the side of animals being inferior or unequal is based on comparing them by human standards. They cant build or use tools, or drive a car (well), or do math. In a definitive sense, were unequal, meaning different, not greater or lesser. But from their perspective, I can't jump 5 times my own height, or lift an airplane, and im all pink and squishy, dont have knives for fingers, cant spit poison, and cant even dig a decent hole to escape down.
So im kinda playing the devils advocate, but I generally look at animals as non human people. Except mosquitoes.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Raash wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

you are confusing your points. You are saying on one hand that animals are factually inferior to humans, and on another hand that they are treated as such and that that will eventually improve. I am saying that animals are not factually inferior to humans regardless of societal perception or treatment, the same as any human. Just because society treats an individual, human or animal, as inferior, as property, as a tool for their amusement, whatever, does not mean that creature is in fact inferior. It means they are under the yoke of an oppressor. The oppressor is not in the right just because he happens to be in a society that approves of or condones his actions.

If you call me a dog your intent is to be insulting. So I will take it as an insult. There are situations in which you could call me a dog, and it would not be insulting. As with all things it is relative to context. We use dog or b-tch as a derogatory term, therefore, it is irrelevant whether I actually percieve dogs as inferior or "bad".

No, i think ive been pretty straight forward with what I think and believe in on a personal level and how the IRL world deals with animals and humans are equals or not.
I say that they are not equal and probably never will be. And that thats how the world works regardless of individuals as you or myself might think otherwise in our daily lives, unless of coarse the big miracle happens and majority of world population will start look at animals with other eyes other then as of food, tools or amusement.
You keep drawing this to a personal level referring to what seems to be a big thing for you, how I "perceive" things. There are numbers of religions/stand points/free thinkers out there wich provide different views and aspects on the matter. Wich beliefs is the true and right ones? Yours? Mine?
There is a pretty big difference between how an individual see something and how the general public in the world does.

And about the dog thing, it is my firm belief that people wouldnt be offended by something he/she see as equal to ones self, regardless of the intended way.
"You [snip] equal!", right?

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

I'm curious what the curseword was.

You are arguing two different points.

1) animals are fundamentally unequal to humans. they are inferior. As an opinion or fact.

2) animals will always be treated as unequals to humans regardless of whether or not they should be considered unequal.

You use #2 a lot but I am not arguing against #2, I am arguing against #1. What society does and perceives as a whole is irrelevant to this. Society does many bad things and perceives many things incorrectly. That does not mean they are true or that we should all follow this thought pattern.

Furthermore, if you can't perceive how context changes the meaning of a word, I don't know what to tell you. It's part and parcel of the English language.

ok. thank you for pointing it out. then i would say i label it as a fact then. They are fundamentally unequal to humans.

the word: start with F and ends with a g, 7 letters.

hrm I still can't figure out what the word is.

Raash

Royalroacho wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

you do not believe people with special needs are equal?

No, I didn't mean for it to come across that way at all. As fellow living beings, I think we're all equal and should treat eachother with respect. Animals, people, possibly plants. The "special needs" comment might have been in poor taste. I've had this debate in real life, and usually people on the side of animals being inferior or unequal is based on comparing them by human standards. They cant build or use tools, or drive a car (well), or do math. In a definitive sense, were unequal, meaning different, not greater or lesser. But from their perspective, I can't jump 5 times my own height, or lift an airplane, and im all pink and squishy, dont have knives for fingers, cant spit poison, and cant even dig a decent hole to escape down.
So im kinda playing the devils advocate, but I generally look at animals as non human people. Except mosquitoes.

That guy wanted to misinterpret that, i believe most others understood your point perfectly well in your original post.

Raash

hrm I still can't figure out what the word is.

Then im sorry. Lets just say I didnt even type a real word at all originally, it was alot of random symbols like ¤ and # and others with the two regular letters on each side of it. And since that got moderated, I find it best not to go there again.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Raash wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

you do not believe people with special needs are equal?

No, I didn't mean for it to come across that way at all. As fellow living beings, I think we're all equal and should treat eachother with respect. Animals, people, possibly plants. The "special needs" comment might have been in poor taste. I've had this debate in real life, and usually people on the side of animals being inferior or unequal is based on comparing them by human standards. They cant build or use tools, or drive a car (well), or do math. In a definitive sense, were unequal, meaning different, not greater or lesser. But from their perspective, I can't jump 5 times my own height, or lift an airplane, and im all pink and squishy, dont have knives for fingers, cant spit poison, and cant even dig a decent hole to escape down.
So im kinda playing the devils advocate, but I generally look at animals as non human people. Except mosquitoes.

That guy wanted to misinterpret that, i believe most others understood your point perfectly well in your original post.

I wasn't misinterpreting anything. I was making a point.

I don't think that he/she actually feels special needs people are inferior, but the point of the post was that animals are rather stupid and bumbly, and therefore inferior. I felt this was corrected in the follow up post that responded to me however.

Different humans have different levels of intellect, and my point was that I do not perceive fellow humans as inferior if they have less intellect than I, therefore it is not a good measure of whether an animal is inferior or not.

AoEnwyr

From a role playing perspective, if I were a hunter I would think cats and dogs are fair game both for meat and pelts. The intelligence of the animal is not relevant, I can kill deer to mammoths and everything else in between. This has nothing to do with what pets you keep at home and isn't about animal cruelty. I have both a dog and cats for pets and love them to bits but if I want to play a feral Bosmer living off the land, kitty should be an option to line my boots.

As for people going on about killable children, stop trolling and attention seeking. There is a difference between hunting and murder. No one fancies a screaming child but to use it as a point to justify being able to murder children in game makes you sound like you are either 13 with limited insight into how to behave socially or a sad, lonely and bitter person who can only feel a sense of power through trying to dominate virtual kids in game.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

UlanX wrote: »

From a role playing perspective, if I were a hunter I would think cats and dogs are fair game both for meat and pelts. The intelligence of the animal is not relevant, I can kill deer to mammoths and everything else in between. This has nothing to do with what pets you keep at home and isn't about animal cruelty. I have both a dog and cats for pets and love them to bits but if I want to play a feral Bosmer living off the land, kitty should be an option to line my boots.

As for people going on about killable children, stop trolling and attention seeking. There is a difference between hunting and murder. No one fancies a screaming child but to use it as a point to justify being able to murder children in game makes you sound like you are either 13 with limited insight into how to behave socially or a sad, lonely and bitter person who can only feel a sense of power through trying to dominate virtual kids in game.

Right, because we don't regularly murder in this game.

As much as you want to make it a personal issue, it just isn't. It doesn't reflect on anyone's real life state. I like to play a terrible person in fantasy games. I spend all day trying to not be bad in real life, so when I play games I want to be especially horrible.

I've killed some pretty innocent people in this game, and worth is not measured to me by age, so innocent is innocent.

Royalroacho

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

you do not believe people with special needs are equal?

No, I didn't mean for it to come across that way at all. As fellow living beings, I think we're all equal and should treat eachother with respect. Animals, people, possibly plants. The "special needs" comment might have been in poor taste. I've had this debate in real life, and usually people on the side of animals being inferior or unequal is based on comparing them by human standards. They cant build or use tools, or drive a car (well), or do math. In a definitive sense, were unequal, meaning different, not greater or lesser. But from their perspective, I can't jump 5 times my own height, or lift an airplane, and im all pink and squishy, dont have knives for fingers, cant spit poison, and cant even dig a decent hole to escape down.
So im kinda playing the devils advocate, but I generally look at animals as non human people. Except mosquitoes.

That guy wanted to misinterpret that, i believe most others understood your point perfectly well in your original post.

I wasn't misinterpreting anything. I was making a point.

I don't think that he/she actually feels special needs people are inferior, but the point of the post was that animals are rather stupid and bumbly, and therefore inferior. I felt this was corrected in the follow up post that responded to me however.

Different humans have different levels of intellect, and my point was that I do not perceive fellow humans as inferior if they have less intellect than I, therefore it is not a good measure of whether an animal is inferior or not.

Dont think theyre stupid or bumbly. Or inferior. Id probly be prone to accidents if I were, say, in an alien ship with technology that was beyond my capacity to comprehend.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Royalroacho wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Royalroacho wrote: »

I was cooking rice just now. The cat jumped on the stove, almost burned her foot, looked at the burner, then tried to run across it. She also gets her head stuck in the blinds while looking out the window, panics, and knocks over my lamp. Shes fallen into the toilet on several occasions. As much as I try and want to consider her an equal, shes never gonna give me a run for my money in a chess match. Not that I consider her inferior, shes being the best cat she can be. But in terms of being equal on human standards, I can see how people disagree. Shes like a special needs child i love and am very fond of. I try to treat her as equitably as possible, even when im grabbing her and yelling "DONT STICK YOUR CLAW IN THE ELECTRICAL SOCKET!!".

wait, this isnt the "funny things my cat does" sub forum...
Sorry, off topic again

you do not believe people with special needs are equal?

No, I didn't mean for it to come across that way at all. As fellow living beings, I think we're all equal and should treat eachother with respect. Animals, people, possibly plants. The "special needs" comment might have been in poor taste. I've had this debate in real life, and usually people on the side of animals being inferior or unequal is based on comparing them by human standards. They cant build or use tools, or drive a car (well), or do math. In a definitive sense, were unequal, meaning different, not greater or lesser. But from their perspective, I can't jump 5 times my own height, or lift an airplane, and im all pink and squishy, dont have knives for fingers, cant spit poison, and cant even dig a decent hole to escape down.
So im kinda playing the devils advocate, but I generally look at animals as non human people. Except mosquitoes.

That guy wanted to misinterpret that, i believe most others understood your point perfectly well in your original post.

I wasn't misinterpreting anything. I was making a point.

I don't think that he/she actually feels special needs people are inferior, but the point of the post was that animals are rather stupid and bumbly, and therefore inferior. I felt this was corrected in the follow up post that responded to me however.

Different humans have different levels of intellect, and my point was that I do not perceive fellow humans as inferior if they have less intellect than I, therefore it is not a good measure of whether an animal is inferior or not.

Dont think theyre stupid or bumbly. Or inferior. Id probly be prone to accidents if I were, say, in an alien ship with technology that was beyond my capacity to comprehend.

right and your post after that I agreed with.

If I were facing off against a tiger in hand to hand combat, the tiger would be superior, inasmuch as you said, they have knives for hands. The tiger is also much better at survival in general. The only advantages humans have is adaptability, tools, and opposable thumbs. Those are very useful, but their value depends entirely upon the situation.

Throw the average person out in the Savannah for a year and they will be dead within a month. Not so for a tiger. You don't always need tools if you are designed for the job in the first place.

Plus we are incapable of perceiving things from an animal's perspective, so our knowledge of what they can comprehend only comes from outside observation.

Araflin

Can we at least agree seagulls should be fair game?

Royalroacho

Araflin wrote: »

Can we at least agree seagulls should be fair game?

Yeah. They usually just end up eating a crushed can or a bone or something, and killing themselves before you get a chance.

AoEnwyr

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

I spend all day trying to not be bad in real life, so when I play games I want to be especially horrible.

That is the most disturbing part of your argument.

I understand people playing different back stories some good, some evil, such is role playing. To say however that you have to try to be a good person IRL and therefore need to be evil onlin to balance out who you are as a person is just the reason why killing children shouldn't be an option.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Royalroacho wrote: »

Araflin wrote: »

Can we at least agree seagulls should be fair game?

Yeah. They usually just end up eating a crushed can or a bone or something, and killing themselves before you get a chance.

you can kill seagulls, but only by throwing plastic can rings out in the trash.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

UlanX wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

I spend all day trying to not be bad in real life, so when I play games I want to be especially horrible.

That is the most disturbing part of your argument.

I understand people playing different back stories some good, some evil, such is role playing. To say however that you have to try to be a good person IRL and therefore need to be evil onlin to balance out who you are as a person is just the reason why killing children shouldn't be an option.

It has nothing to do with balance. I'm playing a game. This isn't real for me, why would I play the same thing as I am in real life? The problem here is you are trying to find some psychological problem because of the way I want to interact with pixels in a game.

It isn't there. Most of us can separate fantasy from reality.