The logical fallacy of Begging the Question is not, as most people use the phrase, asking a question that makes you ask another question. It is, in fact, asking a question in such a manner that the answer is both implied by the question and assumed by the asker. This is what you've done here, when you said ';Logically, hunting down and killing an innocent animal for fun is construed as animal cruelty';. If this statment is in fact true, then your premise is proven, however if it is not true the question cannot be answered.
You see, where you've gone wrong is to assume that legal, ethical hunting fits the DSM definition of animal cruelty, and that an objective psychologist would agree with that definition. The vast majority of Hunters, however, whether hunting for food OR for trophies, want to kill their prey as quickly, humanely, painlessly as possible. The last thing that ANY hunter wants is to spend hours tracking a suffering wounded animal through the woods as it bleeds to death, only to turn around and carry it back out.
As for your final statement ';I'm not saying whether or not I agree with this, I'm just pointing out the facts.';, clearly you do have a position that you're trying to support, the very wording of your statements and questions reveals it. You've stated opinions as facts without doing any significant research to back them up.
Sorry, I don't think you're going to change anyone's mind or get the answer you want here.Hunting a Sign of Dangerous Behavior to come?
Be very aware that PETA, ALF and other animal rights groups cite heavily biased documents as their ';proof'; that their views are correct. Don't just take their word for it.
Report Abuse
Listen to ecologists as well since they will give you straight-up facts and not biased information. You wouldn't type a paper after only researching one source would you? The same holds true here.
Report Abuse
I would suggest trying to work with those who are actually abusing animals, not those who you may or may not think are.
Formula fed veal and foie gras producers should be more important ';targets';than hunters, who actually help animal populations.
Report Abuse
People
Eatting
Tasty
Animals
Report Abuse
Your very response to this quite well written answer shows that you are already biased in your thinking and are not truly interested in knowing all the facts... only the ones that go along with what you already agree with.
Report Abuse
get lost
Report Abuse
Here we go with the Freudian.
You claim “I was only placing relevant facts together”.
Where is these relevant Facts, I see no facts, only an outlandish statement that does no even qualify as a theory.
Hunting has declined over the last 100 years.
According to your hypothetical circumstances claim, the situation should have went critical several 100 years ago.
You’re a moron that cant even come up with a decent Theory.
It’s obvious you flunked Psychology.
And your parents neglected to tell you something important.
That it’s better to silent and thought a Fool, then open your mouth and remove all doubt.
That my opinion.
D58
I don't agree with hunting for sport or just plain shooting an animal for fun; it's what prompts questions like yours and hunters like me get put into a 'category'. I've hunted for years, and only shoot what I intend to eat.
But just to play along, can it also be said that since women are born with vaginas, shouldn't we logically assume that they, according to their bodies, are potential prostitutes?
Hunting is not cruel, have you ever witnessed a pack of wild dogs or hyenas kill a wildebeest? They often begin eating it while still alive. Sharks and many other predators (especially those who prey on insects) consume their prey whole, still alive. And many smarter predators (orca whale, chimps, etc..) will actually play with the prey as it dies.
A single shot to the heart and lungs is far less painful than being ripped apart or ingested while still conscious.
And far better than starving to death or dying of communicable disease.
So cruelty is not a factor in hunting at all, unless you are a bad shot or trully are a pyschopath in which case I am sure your symptoms are prevelant in more activities than just hunting. I would go on to assume that the percentage of ';psychopaths'; who hunt is proportianly quite small.
Also I have never killed an animal merely for ';fun'; I have consumed every single one. Whether trophy hunting is ethical or not is not something I will personally take issue on. I don't engage in it, but it is a personal choice so I cannot condem those who participate in it. Many donate meat which they themselves will not consume to charities for the less fortunate, so I wholly support those individuals.
What about slaughter house owners? They themselves will never eat or donate all the meat which they produce, and their ';victims'; have no fair chance of survival. Surely these people are more pyschopathic than a hunter.
Your question is misleading. First of all, hunting is survival. It goes back to the hunter/gathering days when Man first crawled out of the caves. It is instinctive and more prevalent in some than others. Hunting is not animal cruelty. Animal torture or abuse is.
Hunting, whether for food or sport, involves humanely taking your game, not torturing it. This is why the hunter should always match his weapon to the game and why I personally never bow n arrow hunt.
Finally, psychology is an inexact science. Why would any sane person add hunting to animal abuse/torture??? Hunting is acting out behavioral, survival instinct. Torturing animals is pulling the the wings off butterflies and torturing kittens and puppies. Grow up.
H
bghoundawg's answer is a good one. For my part, I would say that hunting just to kill is sick -- people who kill just for the sake of killing would fit your ';psychotic'; definition. However, to think that modern hunters kill just for that sake would be wrong. We don't. Killing is only a small part of hunting. ';Hunting for fun'; is not animal cruelty -- killing for fun probably is. Animals are amoral -- they don't have a moral position on their actions, and thus probably shouldn't be called innocent or guilty of anything. Innocence is a human institution that applies only to our moral claims (and the capacity and reason for those moral claims is also still up for debate). Logically, hunting down and killing ';innocent'; animals for fun is not what modern hunters do (some people do -- they're not hunters, and may be prone to psychotic behavior). If you actually are against hunting, then go away. If you just suffer ignorance, then learn more about the subject before you make judgements or theories.
look, its real simple....hunting just for the sake of killing is wrong. real hunters, outdoorsmen, etc. eat what they kill and they know that killing game is only a small part of the hunting experience. so, if someone is killing game just for fun, then yeah, they may have future problems or be a future problem.
If you are going to consider hunting cruelty to animals, wouldn't the commercial slaughter of animals be much more cruel. Wouldn't it be true then that those of us who are standing around talking about it while slaughterhouses continue to operate are just as guilty and cruel as hunters. I don't consider hunters cruel, because I think that hunting is a far less cruel way of killing animals than most commercial methods.
I may be psychotic, but I damn sure eat good all year.
Yes, I completely agree. I have scientific and historical data to back up my hypothesis.
Ok here goes, Humans and our early ancestors were ALL hunters. Before we learned to destroy natural habitat for farming and domesticate animals for slaughter we were ALL hunters. That’s right, even if you choose to ignore reality, we ARE all predator hunters and every one of our ancestors descended from hunters.
Now that we have established that we are all hunters we can proceed with the second part of the hypothesis. Notice how evil, wicked, mean and nasty the human race is. Why? Well, because we are all hunters.
Now that I answered your question I have a few for you. You mention the hunting of “innocent” animals. Innocence is a human concept derived from laws, animals are neither innocent nor guilty because animals, as far as I know, don’t have courts, or attorneys, judges, etc. Is a deer innocent and a cow in a slaughter house guilty? Is a trout I catch innocent and the tuna for sushi guilty?
Why do you anti-hunters constantly refer to animals as innocent? We all know how confused you anti hunters are. Have YOU people never realized how confused you are? Or how dumb you sound to the rest of the world every time you attach human qualities to animals?
First of all, if you want an answer to your question, then you need to put it in the medical/mental section, not the hunting. This is section were hunters answer hunters. This it not for you to ask these ridiculous questions. Secondly, hunters never kill innocent animals, regardless of what you, and other people think. We hunt because it is one way we feed ourselves and our family. THIS NOT ANIMAL CRUELTY! If you are talking about a drunken dude that beats up on his dog and house cat, then I can see a obvious sign of violent behavior, which need to be looked at. If you are pointing out the facts, do your homework and you'll find there are no ';facts'; to your question. How can you say ';logically'; when there is no logic to to you question? There's a thought, use your common sense to figure out your question. But it appears that you don't have any. Who is the pyscho for dreaming up such a question? Not us hunters.
first a animal is nether Innocent nor guilty .we do not hunt them for that reason
I have been hunting for over 25 years, been the cause of death of well over 1000 animals. Deer, bear, rabbit, quail, dove,squirrel, ground hogs, crows, frogs, turtles,rats, mice,ducks...ok. maybe 2000 or more. Have yet to shoot a human. But I do get the urge when I see or hear crap like YOU have to spew. If you dont like hunting, STAY OUT of hunting topics and other conversations having to do with it. You, nor any of the other PETA heads out there will ever change a red blooded hunters way of life. Dont like it? fine, dont do it. I dont want to live on veggies and kelp or just beef and chicken, but I dont condemn anyone if they do
First, before you point out facts learn to spell Psychology. I'm not really sure what pyschopathic is. Is that cutting a tinkle in the woods? Are we talking about hunting for sport? I agree that it is wrong to kill an animal out of meanness. Most hunters I know actually have the meat butchered with deer. Otherwise they pay to have the hides treated and/or tanned. Of course some animals are pests(I mean that now)like rabbits(yes, I know they are cute)and squirrels, mice, rats, etc.. I guess it is a test of manhood(don't know why myself)to hunt animals. I think it's a little more fair using bows and arrows. Having a dead animal's head on the wall just isn't in anymore. Second, how do you KNOW the animals killed are innocent? I've got a theory that all the animals killed for food are EVIL and have been condemned to be eaten by humans by a court of their peers. Third, all the hunters I know are probably less inclined to commit dangerous crimes as they take out their animal urges by hunting. Surely, in your life time you have killed at least one fly? Personally, I suspect anyone who is against hunting as a sport of having a personality disorder.
I go hunting all the time. One time while I was rabbit hunting, I shot a rabbit. Unfortunately(for him) I only blew off his hind legs. He tried to get away by crawling with his front legs. Of course I caught up with him, and stomped his head. MMMM rabbit stew!!!
First off there is a difference between killing an animal and a human. Just because we kill an animal (hunt/harvest) does not mean we feel it's morally right to kill a human (murder).
Humans are predators. It is a fact that we are predators and a fact that from time to time we have to rely on meat for survival.
So how can hunters be considered cold blooded murderers, which is something that anti-hunters like to generalize hunters as (even though they are more likely to have a criminal record due to their radical views and behavior)? People hunt simply to act out on their primitive instincts, and not because they crave bloodshed. They hunt because animals are a resource and meat is in our diet. Some people would rather enjoy the outdoors and the thrill of the hunt rather than buy their meat. Sport hunting gives humans that opportunity and it's also very beneficial to wildlife populations and their habitat.
Humans have a brain you know, and are able to tell the difference between our prey and each other. Somebody who eats meat but considers hunting cruel is in a huge amount of denial. That animal they're eating didn't just give themselves up. It had to be killed. People just don't want to accept that what they eat had to die. It's a fact of life and the reality of humans being at the top of the food chain.
Humans are a living organism part of the ecosystem, meaning we must take from earth's resources to survive (and we in turn give back to the ecosystem). Just because we have a conscience and complex emotions that may make us question the morality of killing an animal, does not change the fact that we must still take from the earth's resources to survive whether is be plant or animal.
I personally don't condone the torturing of animals, nor unneccesary harm of animals. I do however hunt, and believe it is okay to do so. Just because Bambi is a cute movie doesn't change the fact that we are predator and they are prey.
Since modern civilization gives us the luxury to not have to actually kill for our meat, and the luxury of surviving on plants alone, you may not see the need to kill animals anymore. That is your decision based on your morals. It still does not change anything.
I think you have apoint there, I personally do not agree with hunting animals for sport but there is a difference between hunting an animal for sport and torture of an animal. I think the animal cruelty referred to in psychology is that of the latter, often domesticated animals such as cats or small dogs are treated badly and killed slowly and the person (psychopath) enjoys the experience and moves on to kill other bigger things and can eventually lead to harming or murdering humans. Just because this does happen in some cases does not mean it happens in every such case...
I guess it is however disturbing to admit that we have developed as a race by killing animals and people and the killer instinct is still strong in many of us crazy or not!
Hunting and shooting for forty years. No criminal record. No urge to hunt down anyone and shoot them dead. So is it safe to say that i don't fit ? Into the modern psychological profile Your referring to. The question you asked doesn't belong in this section. Hell its not even a question its a broad statement of your personal beliefs take it somewhere else please.
No comments:
Post a Comment