A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Start a new discussion in the public forum
Post a new thread
If your post relates to a particular game please include the URL or ID#
of the game.
If you are posting a feature request please check that it isn't mentioned in the todo list.
If you are posting a question please check the FAQ before posting.
If your message is long you may need to write a summary message, and add the full message as a reply.
If you are incapable of knowing you exist you're not conscious, in my opinion.
I am coming to the conclusion though that this is something that cannot be further discussed without introducing some more scientific evidence which either A) doesn't exist B) I am much too unmotivated and busy to go find.
So I declare this debate a success lol thank you guys for chiming it was interesting.
At least you admit you nor I can determine if an animal know's it exists for certain. Hopefully you realize we must error on the side of caution and assume all animals which display certain attributes (call it anthromorphism if you like) like a full range of emotive responses (not just reproduce the species, hunt for food, and fight or flight survival) may well be in the self-aware category. Lack of communicative ability via language does not mean lack of awareness.
""Only humans can act morally or immorally as that is a construct of society."
Exactly. Human and other conscious animals that is. Hint hint."
Sorry to chime back in, but morality =/= consciousness. You are stating a flase equivalency here. Morality isn't required for conciousness.. Look at Jeffrey Dahlmer. No, all that is required is self-awareness and many animlas have it. Again, I dare say most mammalian and even most reptilian, amphibian, and avian life do. The only real way we have to divide self-aware/sentianet/conscious from non aware life is through perceived emotion and individual response.
If a lone animal does nothing but search for it's next meal or mate and only shows emotion in the form of fight or flight, then it is less likely self-aware (like most sharks). Or if it is of a hive/school mentality and has no individual identity or personality (like most schooling fish and most insects) then it is also likely not self-aware. But even that is an uncertainty. It's fiction, but the aliens in Ender's Game were presented as self-aware with a collective mind. similarly the Borg in Trek. It is possible that there is a colony/collective awareness that makes the group as a whole become a sentient life form even if the individuals aren't. That would make destroying a wasp nest with fire a cruel act.
"Yes there is, you save their lives, and you die, or you save your life, and they die."
This is why analogies are so obnoxious, because you can an invent an absurd analogy that has no relation to real life and give it all these properties that are convenient for your argument.
There is no intrinsic conflict because the fire was not caused by the fact that you yourself are alive. The fire was caused by something else, so it's very possible that the fire could be prevented and everyone lives. It might even be possible, in fact probable that a person rushing into a burning building 100 times without dying would also manage to save himself.
In the other example however there *is* an intrinsic conflict because the very fact that the person is living at all results in the death of microorganisms. It cannot be avoided. A world cannot be constructed in which there is coexistence.Basically you're saying I have to argue species suicide for human beings otherwise my worldview is not consistent, so it's either species suicide or dogs are automatons with no feelings. I reject that false and absurd dichotomy.
And yes I know you're going to keep repeating the point about the fact that you need to philosophize about life in order to really exist, else you're nothing more alive than an airplane that is programmed to beep on contact. The comparison is again silly because airplanes are not organic, they're not alive. They are programmed to respond in certain ways, they're not actually feeling anything because they're not alive. Furthermore airplanes do not act to do whatever it can to avoid pain, unlike animals. To animals the feeling is so unpleasant that they have fear and avoid the cause of pain. Planes can only do what is commanded of them and or what they're programmed to do. That might even involve heading straight into what caused them "pain".
"You seem to be saying that animals can be forgiven for just following their instincts - crocs eat animals, so, there you go."
I doubt very much that getting killed by a crocodile is a very painful process, since their jaws are so strong and they cannot chew. Crocodiles cannot be "designed" in such a way that they aren't carnivorous and don't have powerful jaws. They are what they are. They have the "right" to survive. Humans have nothing to do with it. Crocodiles exist to keep ecosystems in balance. Animals do not act out of balance with their environment, humans do.
"But we humans have been hunters for a very long time, and have also been molding and exploiting our environment for a very long time too, also in an attempt to survive."
What % of humans are hunters today, as in they hunt to live not for sport? Very few. Only the most primitive societies. We have conquered our environment to such a degree that hunting is absolutely unnecessary. We have developed to such an extent that we now know how to feed ourselves in such a way that avoids unnecessary suffering. Our teeth reflect the fact that we no longer need to rely on consumption of meat to live.
Need is defined in a straight forward way. What is imperative for survival. Crocodiles are carnivores, they cannot exist without eating meat. They cannot go to the supermarket to get their daily nutritional intake. They are subject to what is in their immediate environment. They have not conquered the environment. We have. Since we've conquered it, in order maintain balance with it we have to stop using the excuses of "instincts" (which are irrelevant for humans anyway) and be more deliberate about how we interact with it. Use those big brains you keep touting as the reason why we're of "superior intrinsic value" to all other (automaton) lifeforms.
Local idiots are slaughtering shooting to kill 48 escaped exotic animals because they happened to escape a local exotic animal farm (in Ohio). This includes tigers, apes, and lions. Seriously, killing tigers should be a capital offense.
I guess I successfully predicted the future in the October ghost ratings topic
As of Friday, I was in four games. In the last 24 hours (well, 30 technically, but it's close) I received the following message three times: "You were defeated, and lost your bet; better luck next time!" Bye bye, highest GR spot for me to date. I've never been so soundly defeated so often in so short a time.
The United States intervention in World War Two cost 418,000 American lives. And, really, what did the United States gain from it? Hitler was gone and Nazi Germany was destroyed, but much of Eastern Europe running from East Germany to Russia was under the (de jure or de facto) rule of Stalin and the Soviet Union. U.S. intervention fostered the spread of communism by destroying its primary opponent, fascism, thus setting up the Cold War for the next fifty years.
I have always been intrigued by this opening (sev-->black sea, warsaw-->galicia, moscow-->st pete's, st pete's-->gulf of bothnia) but have never really had the balls to try it out. Does anyone prefer this opening/has anyone won by this opening? Any general thoughts on its merits/detriments are welcomed.
Hi I used to use the email dip judges, and am rather new to the Webdip site. I really like the setup, but I'm not a huge fan of how the maps are drawn. is it possible to generate a "results" map without the arrows for a more uncluttered look?
I am wanting to sit down and play a good game. I was wanting it to be 10-20 min for each turn. Bet only 5. It would be zero but it seems that is not allowed. I require 6 additional players. If you would like to play reply to this thread and spread the word. Once I have the needed players I will post the link to the game. Enjoy, looking forward to a game and have a good day.
In game Supper's ready France and Austria has a strange comportament: Austria has 18 SC plus other 2 SC to conquer to France and win instead he does not finish the game leaving the SCs to France while France announces that he wants more England's SCs before Austria win... It's not regular do I ask the intervent of moderators... Thanks
I just read an article on the BBC, basically someone got sacked for saying women in New Zealand get paid 12% less, but it's because they need more leave (in particular he hinted at women's menstrual cycle as causing regular sick leave in some women)..
when someone is playing 2 countries in a game or chatting to another player to co-ordinate moves in GUNBOAT, Is there anything that can be done to ban them. Ive checked there records and they have played together alot and the cheating is clear.
I learned today that, according to polls, a solid 40-50% of Americans believe in Young-Earth creationism, the view that God directly made the Earth and humans (no evolution!) about 6,000-10,000 years ago. Yay for American intelligence!
Well, ill apologize to the community. I wasn't trying to gain points, just fool around in the forums. I hope the community will realize that. I will take what the mods decide to do with me. And i hope i am not shunned (thank goodness you are all not draugnar, j/k drag) Think about my situation here.
I am very concerned that two players in a game I just joined are cheating, however I don't know how to take care of them. I see from another thread here that we can't post cheating accusations on the forum, so... what do I do?
Dear fellow players: Let me apologize for my lousy play as France. Italy, you took advantage of the situation well, but that was one of the sloppiest outings I've had on the site. Best to all in the future.