Comment on "Being vegan is unnatural"

• lalo@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  They are a nonhuman animal that has sentience, property of mine. Let’s call them hooman.

  You know hypotheticals are used to test consistency in someone’s logic and answering these will end up in you admitting absurdities. If I wasn’t interested in the truth, I would avoid answering them as well.

  source

  • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    They’re absurd because they’re a false equivalency, which is a logical fallacy. Animal livestock are not comparable to human slaves.

    What’s it say when your logic does not work for real life scenarios, so you have to make up nonsense fantasy scenarios to try to force an inconsistency?

    source

    • lalo@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Pay attention and read what I’ve said once more, In no moment I equated nor compared animal livestock to human slaves (btw, even if I would have compared, a comparison is not an equivalency and therefore not false equivalency fallacy).

      Now you claiming my logic does not work in real life scenarios is a modal fallacy. My hypotheticals are in the logical scope (true in a possible world), not the physical scope (true in our possible world). You clearly can’t answer my hypotheticals because they expose your flaw in reasoning.

      Will you answer my questions now or keep avoiding them like fire so you don’t burn yourself?

      source

      • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        If the scenarios you’ve proposed cannot be compared or equated to the topic at hand, then they aren’t relevant.

        If your logic worked in real life or with the topic we are actually discussing, then prove it by sticking to reality.

        source

        • -> View More Comments