Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Is it morally wrong to kill purely for fun?

  1. Top | #11
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    31,985
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    128,737
    Rep Power
    100
    It depends on what you're killing.

    Go hunting flies for fun, no problem.

  2. Top | #12
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,343
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    10,931
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by ruby sparks

    With those caveats in place, the first thing we can say is that it is not, as far as we know, objectively or independently morally wrong, using the definition of either as meaning 'not dependent on the mind for existence; actual'.
    Those are two very different things, so which definition is it?
    I mean, you say 'not dependent on the mind for existence; actual', but 'not dependent on the mind for existence' and 'actual' are very different concepts. For example, psychosis, psychopathy, love, hatred, anger, are all very much actual, but all of them depend on a mind for their existence - as all mental states, properties, etc.

  3. Top | #13
    Super Moderator ruby sparks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    9,167
    Rep Power
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ruby sparks

    With those caveats in place, the first thing we can say is that it is not, as far as we know, objectively or independently morally wrong, using the definition of either as meaning 'not dependent on the mind for existence; actual'.
    Those are two very different things, so which definition is it?
    I mean, you say 'not dependent on the mind for existence; actual', but 'not dependent on the mind for existence' and 'actual' are very different concepts. For example, psychosis, psychopathy, love, hatred, anger, are all very much actual, but all of them depend on a mind for their existence - as all mental states, properties, etc.
    Ok I would run with 'not dependent on the mind for existence'.
    "Let us hope that it is not so. Or if it is, let us pray that the fact does not become generally known."

  4. Top | #14
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    2,565
    Rep Power
    22
    My definition of morality is that it is a cultural adaptation for the survival of the human species. That's because we normally concern ourselves with practical issues when we discuss morality. But it's really more than cultural and is the result of biological and genetic traits that make humans what they are, a highly social and communal species. But those factors are usually taken to be a given and typically ignored in the arguments. To get a truer and more objective view I have to broaden the definition to include how these factors operate in other species we normally don't attribute a moral conscience to. For instance the group dynamics of other social species such as a wolf pack and their learned hierarchy. But it extends beyond these to mostly solitary species such as bears or cougars. It might be considered immoral for one cougar to share it's territory with another since it would be detrimental to their survival needs. At the most fundamental level morality is about survival of the species. And so, from that perspective, every moral decision comes down to how it ultimately effects the long term survival of the human species. Obviously there exists a complex web of rules and traditions and relationships that complicate how any one issue influences the overall probability of human survival. But it's also obvious that the complete breakdown of that web would have drastic consequences.

    It also needs to be recognized that many moral decisions are based on symbolic values. That's why we consider killing of any kind and of any species as something to be treated with a degree of deference. A demonstration of an indifference for life, and especially sentient life, and especially life that closely resembles human life in some respect, is generally treated as morally wrong unless there are mitigating issues that provide reasons to value such behavior. In the case of hunting for sport this is the symbolic value of hunting as a historically common good. Absent that virtue there is probably no moral support for killing other species that would be for "fun" only. And probably that provides a good operational definition of "fun" to be doing things that produce a thrill because they are in some way dangerous to the common good. Fun needs to have some redeeming value to justify the assumed risk. Otherwise it is by example detrimental to the moral fabric.

  5. Top | #15
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Austin Tx
    Posts
    10
    Rep Power
    9
    Ants and mosquitoes yes

  6. Top | #16
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    4,882
    Rep Power
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    It depends on what you're killing.

    Go hunting flies for fun, no problem.
    You need to buy a bug assault rifle! Very fun. It's so much fun that people buy fly larve to hatch more flies to go hunting.

  7. Top | #17
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    11,543
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    29,449
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    It depends on what you're killing.

    Go hunting flies for fun, no problem.
    True. Yet it is we who rank animals according to value. Value according to us.

  8. Top | #18
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    2,565
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    It depends on what you're killing.

    Go hunting flies for fun, no problem.
    True. Yet it is we who rank animals according to value. Value according to us.
    Killing flies and many other disease carriers is a virtue in many circumstances. Killing all flies everywhere is not. It would in fact be immoral.

  9. Top | #19
    Veteran Member WAB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, AZ
    Posts
    3,593
    Archived
    2,174
    Total Posts
    5,767
    Rep Power
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    It depends on what you're killing.

    Go hunting flies for fun, no problem.
    You need to buy a bug assault rifle! Very fun. It's so much fun that people buy fly larve to hatch more flies to go hunting.
    Then try mosquitoes. Just remember, be careful with mosquitoes. There's nothing more dangerous than a wounded mosquito.
    A man should never be ashamed to own that he has been in the wrong, which is but saying in other words that he is wiser today than he was yesterday.
    - Alexander Pope

  10. Top | #20
    Elder Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    11,543
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    29,449
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    It depends on what you're killing.

    Go hunting flies for fun, no problem.
    True. Yet it is we who rank animals according to value. Value according to us.
    Killing flies and many other disease carriers is a virtue in many circumstances. Killing all flies everywhere is not. It would in fact be immoral.
    It is a virtue to kill flies in many circumstances, a virtue and a necessity for us. The flies that are being killed may have a different perspective.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •