• Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I apologize for making conclusions about your position without providing the reasoning for my conclusion.

    I appreciate that but like I said before, you should focus on responding to what I wrote. You seem incredibly focused on reading between the lines, to the point that you’re only reading in between and ignoring the content of the lines themselves.

    You said you made conclusions about my position: I feel like you still really don’t even know what my position is. That includes this comment because in spite of how I asked you to respond to what I actually wrote, you just kept right on trying to guess what I might be “implying”. Once again: If I wanted to say it, I would have written it down.

    This also wouldn’t be so much of a problem if you were making reasonably charitable assumptions, but your assumptions have all basically started out assuming I’m an idiot and extremist and would be implying absurd things. It’s kind of insulting.

    a trivial part of societal waste (animals)

    Animal agriculture actually doesn’t have a trivial effect on the environment.

    It doesn’t matter a single bit what an individual does on their own without collective action.

    You have to “be the change you want to see in the world”. Obviously each of the 8 billion people on the planet can’t just casually do something that changes the whole world in major way.

    Also, even if something isn’t visible on a global scale it can still “matter”. A single murder isn’t going to make a difference in global death statistics. Right? But it’s going to “matter” if the victim is you, or someone you care about. So doing things that help individuals still has value.

    The things you have suggested can be boiled down to reducing individual consumption. But the logical conclusion of that line of thinking is that zero consumption of the individual is the ideal situation. The only way for a living being to consume nothing is to kill themselves before breeding. So how can that possibly be a reasonable solution?

    How is it possible to write something this ridiculous without realizing there’s a problem?

    Me: We should brush our teeth regularly.

    You: [reads the above, thinks to self] KerfuffleV2 says we should brush our teeth regularly. What could be more regular than continuously brushing our teeth? But if we continuously brush our teeth we won’t be able to eat or drink! We’ll die of dehydration and exhaustion!

    You: [exclaims in horror] Oh my god, why do you want to kill everyone!? You monster!

    Me: Huh?

    I am a person that likes to “engage” but I don’t see how I can with you. You just twist everything I say beyond recognition.