In regards to 'drawing a line', why do you feel a need to draw a line at all <font color=red>Ladyzekke</font>? Why does so-called intelligence equal importance to you? I'm asking this genuinely, I'm interested to know.

I think you raise an excellent point regarding the killing of plants. Plants are alive. They live and die and mate and feed. In eating them you cause just as much death as you do when eating a cow or chicken. So I can never help but quietly smirk at those who choose vegetarianism for 'moral', 'merciful' reasons.

In regards to torture: have you ever watched a cat catch and eat a mouse or bird? The way most cats 'play with their food' so to speak can truly be a gruesome and sobering spectacle to behold. It is quite possible that in little Kensington's lifetime he had probably tortured just as many creatures as his executioners... but as most animals discover, somewhere, somehow, there is always another creature with bigger, sharper and stronger claws than you.

[ 09-15-2004, 10:31 PM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]

Dunno Hierophant. I guess more intelligent creatures are more cherished because they are considered more aware. I think the most horrible thing in life, whether it be human or an animal, is to know in detail your own demise. I think to be ignorant is, indeed, bliss. In other words, it is more horrible for something to die knowing what it is happening to it, and the end result, rather an an animal that only knows it is being harmed, has some instinctual fear, but does not understand what it all means. If that makes sense.

Sometimes I wonder if it would be better to be some retard, living happily and simply, not understanding much of anything but the most basic things. No concept of death, of war, of hate.. You could kill me and I'd just go down with silly simple thoughts in my head, maybe a "wha" at the end there.

Yes. That makes sense. I don't empathise, but your view makes sense.

Who says you have to have a concept of death and war and hate? Such things are mere words, packets of structured interpretation. Change the way you interpret the world, and you change the world itself, at least from your own vantage point. Much of what you would consider fundamental and true can be as flimsy and transitory as ink on a page.

[ 09-15-2004, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]

Well it can be hard to stay away from things like, war, hate, death, etc., in one's life. I suppose you could do it if you stopped watching the news LOL.

BTW, off topic to everyone, just wanted to say, this thread to me is a perfect example of what debates should be about. I see so many threads, especially those in the Current Events forum, that get out of hand, people insulting eachother, and insulting others' opinions, because they so vehemently disagree. Sometimes people can disagree but still learn from eachother, and even if in the end they still don't jibe and see things in different perspectives, they can still be friends, and civil. There doesn't have to be a "winner" in a debated topic you know. ;)

Very good discussion, indeed, LZ! I admit though that the whole thing makes me queasy and I just couldn't bring myself to look at the 'art' or 'not art' if you will.

I would like to kill the human that hurts the cat. FILM THAT! pieces of shit. Lucky this 'fest' isn't near my ass, I'd show up and bust some ASS.

Heh, true. But what I meant was that you don't have to view events in life as 'war' or 'death' specifically.
When I see news bulletins of people slaughtering each other in Iraq, or the Sudan or Afghanistan (again, 'countries' are transitory things as well), or anywhere, I do not see such things as war or hate. I see life expressing rage with itself, I see an ecstatic explosion of virulently conflicting predatory forces. This is no tragedy, oblivion comes to all minds. Pain is an influx of data into the consciousness. Suffering and sadness (as well as joy and happiness) are particular, but by no means mandatory, interpretations of this data, nothing more nothing less. To me, death is merely a transfer of flesh, surrendering one body to fuel another. Again, no tragedy.

But that's just my take. I could be wrong.

[ 09-15-2004, 11:29 PM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]

<font color=lime>This has become an excellent thread. [img]graemlins/awesomework.gif[/img]
I do agree and believe that we are just a highly (by our measure ;) ) evolved species, that developed civilised society and as we evolved socially, we also evovled a moral compass.
I would think Hiero, that even back in the ancient, there were people that did not prefer to watch the killing of their own food, as there is today, granted the "western" soc. evo. has made it more taboo and grotesque.
This brings us to the present day in society, where we have a very wide spectrum of what is considered, good, bad, beautifull, disgusting, right, wrong, art, etc...

What it comes down to for me is, it is a pathetic, pschycotic reach for attention, using shock methods, and should be punished by the law.
But as far as wether its art or not...it takes alllllll kinds. Maybe it is... </font>

LZ, I have the perfect song for this line of thinking! Not on a serious note, I warn you! BTW, I would provide a link for it, but I have no hosting space, so that's a no-go. I'm gonna e-mail it to ya, though, it's just too good not to!

I'm not so sure, LZ. Maybe some people are just that far gone, but I think many of those that we say are "mentally handicapped," have a very good idea of death and hate, at least. Of course, by that token, they also understand love and life, which is really cool! Also, death is often painful, so, in a very simplified mind it would be "AAAAAHHH!! They're choking me! Hurts! Can't breathe!!" Kinda like a normally capable human! lol [img]smile.gif[/img]

</font>
Oh by all means. But my point is that such squeemishness was not the socially encouraged norm. I think that modern Western society still functions under the same principles of hierarchal dominion and force that 'ancient' European cultures did, yet modern 'pity' morality encourages people to feel guilty about it, when there really isn't any need to.

The ripping apart of live animals was once part of a religious ritual in Ancient Greece called Sparagmos. In worship of Dionysus (the God of wine, music, theatre and the overall chaotic release of primeval energy and the dissolution of social order), Maenads (revelling female celebrants) would be allowed out of their cowed household existance to roam the mountains for several days where they would sing and dance and perform 'mystery' rites. To conclude the festival, the revellers would capture wild animals and tear them apart with their bare hands, leaving their flesh to rot in the wildnerness. Such a ritual was thousands of years old, and spanned numerous cultures and religious traditions. There are numerous interpretaions as to why this ritual took place, but the point I'm trying to make is that the perversity of such an act depends upon social consensus. For the Greeks, such an act was a holy thing, and reflected the primeval power of Dionysus. To a modern Christian, or indeed merely to a modern 'consumer', it would appear to be mere cruelty. Yet neither interpretation is necessarily 'right' or 'wrong', in an objective sense.

[ 09-16-2004, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]