this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2024
175 points (97.3% liked)

Asklemmy

43328 readers
1022 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JohnnyEnzyme@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Evolution doesn’t care about ideal mechanics- only good enough. Rape was common in the ancient world. Rape happens today despite the long term survival favoring long term pairs.

There's certainly some facts & reality there, professor, but that still doesn't change the fundamental point which Adams' made, and I defended. It's like you're freely swinging from 'matters of proportion' to binary values in order to fit your argument.

So attributing nobility to what is really a lack of ability is like attributing nobility to a rock.

Which was a poor analogy from day one, considering the many permutations.
Also-- that's a pretty weird, tight-ass understanding of what Adams meant by "nobility."
Like, seriously...?

A rooster would plot and murder its neighbors if it had the intelligence and opposable thumbs to make weapons.

Okay, you win on that one-- I fear you're exactly right there; ala chickens being such unnecessary assholes towards each other and other creatures.

Tell you what, though-- feel free to have the last reply.
It's like you dance around a smidgen of a circuitous argument, but can never actually figure out what you're actually trying to say. (or think) Good luck, you.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

but that still doesn’t change the fundamental point

A poster pointed out that animals aren't better than humans and will do anything they can get away with just like humans. You attempted to appeal to evolution which I refuted. The refutation means Adams is wrong. Animals are like humans because humans are animals too.

It’s like you dance around a smidgen of a circuitous argument

You insult when you've been proven wrong. Nice.

[–] JohnnyEnzyme@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

OH!
My poor little one... :-(

[–] locuester@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Tell you what, though-- feel free to have the last reply.

😒

[–] JohnnyEnzyme@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

Ohh, you're so clever...
You got me, pard!