Posted: Sep 28, 2018 11:19 pm
by jamest
Have you seen this other thread, posted in my beloved philosophy forum? ... ... 55498.html

... Essentially about whether dogs are more important than art/culture. Started 3 days ago, the poll is currently 15 to 7 in favour of (saving) the unknown dog (instead) of the well-known art/culture.

That worries me somewhat as what those 15 bozos don't understand is that the dog in itself IS a cultural icon. Do these people think that they get to decide for themselves what's worthy of being a loved pet, compared to all other animals, or do they have the brains to realise that they were brought up in a society which made these decisions for them centuries ago?

We (also) brainwash our own kids with the pets we have and the cuddly toys we buy them, before they are even old enough to think about it. It's really no coincidence then, that the bozos who would probably save the dog unless the aforementioned thread was about any other animal that wasn't cute or that we ate, might have voted as they did.

I'm not going to vote/partcipate in that other thread as it's an affront to the standards demanding of intelligent/rational thought (philosophy), but at least I've got something out of watching that car crash, which is that relative values of any kind are grotesque.

Seek ye therefore absolute values, or nothing.