No living entity "benefits" by coming into existence
 

On 2/07/2010 8:13 AM, bundling snowfalls wrote:
On 2/07/2010 8:08 AM, zenworm wrote:
On Jul 1, 6:22 pm, bundling wrote:
On 2/07/2010 12:46 AM, zenworm wrote:





On Jul 1, 10:49 am, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 10:41 PM, zenworm wrote:

On Jul 1, 10:04 am, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 10:01 PM, zenworm wrote:

On Jun 30, 6:00 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:56 AM, zenworm wrote:

On Jun 30, 5:51 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:39 AM, zenworm wrote:

On Jun 30, 2:34 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of
an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus
no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's
welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock
animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor".
We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or
benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be
once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if,
suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock
animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals"
would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any
animals. There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have
no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the
existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for
meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.

for the birds?

^~

i'm a good aim with a rifle and
i shot a bird on my best friends
farm one day, glad i did it. i
see how superficial the joy i
was having was compared to the
life i took, or just winged it?
there was no joy anymore for me.

Perhaps all 'sin' can be summed up in one word:

"waste".

^~

yes. there are better things to do
than being shot or eaten i'm sure.

none escape the worms

^~

but i'm ever so fresh

"yes. there are better things to do
than being shot or eaten i'm sure."

certainty? 100%?

"better"?

1 - birth(procreation)
2 - eat(consume)& breed(procreate)
3 - death(being consumed)

What else is there?

Is there anything other than
consumption and procreation?

^~

I've been over this. From a point of view
upholding the values of an animal as "life"
the process of life appears rather empty,
hold onto that child inside because when it
is gone you are dead. Dying Animals. Life
continues on and this is by procreation but
the purpose of "breeding" is beyond exist-
ence it's also an evolution of the forms...
and in the forms Light and Life stay fresh.
You appear to be taking the darker pov and
I suppose the emptiness appears "spiritual".
It's a vague matter for me, but it opposes
a far more vibrant view of the universe.

"the purpose of "breeding" is beyond existence
it's also an evolution of the forms...
and in the forms Light and Life stay fresh."

so life is sacred to a purpose of evolution?
given that evolution is better served the greater the
diversity and population, that means there is a definitive
benefit to that purpose(evolution), of having more species
and more animals alive breeding in the purpose of evolution.
in short:
greater biomass + greater biodiversity =
greater advantage to evolution =
a benefit to all life existent and not yet existent

yah..... i like to make things nice
before the bubby gets here, that is
not to say it's beneficial to exist
opposed to not existing but it is to
exist well, versus existing unwell.



more options = advantage/benefit?

is the advancement of evolution a benefit/advantage
for the forms that have not yet come into existence?

^~

once they come into existence?


from where?

^~

i believe in reincarnation. but let's
snip out the vegetarian group. cough.

prior to that? stuff. we come from
stuff that is not organized as beings.
except for the semen i suppose.

prior to everything? it's a mystery?

prior to existence we come from
"prior to existence", if there was
such a thing, assuming so.

i believe in reincarnation, so prior to
physical existence i believe many of us
probably coulda maybe existed already.

then it could well be a benefit or a
suffering to the individual to be born.
in my opinion it isn't either 100%.

No living entity "benefits" by coming into existence
 

On 2/07/2010 8:18 AM, bundling snowfalls wrote:
On 2/07/2010 8:13 AM, bundling snowfalls wrote:
On 2/07/2010 8:08 AM, zenworm wrote:
On Jul 1, 6:22 pm, bundling wrote:
On 2/07/2010 12:46 AM, zenworm wrote:





On Jul 1, 10:49 am, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 10:41 PM, zenworm wrote:

On Jul 1, 10:04 am, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 10:01 PM, zenworm wrote:

On Jun 30, 6:00 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:56 AM, zenworm wrote:

On Jun 30, 5:51 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:39 AM, zenworm wrote:

On Jun 30, 2:34 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of
an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus
no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's
welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock
animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor".
We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or
benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be
once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if,
suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock
animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals"
would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any
animals. There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have
no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the
existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for
meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.

for the birds?

^~

i'm a good aim with a rifle and
i shot a bird on my best friends
farm one day, glad i did it. i
see how superficial the joy i
was having was compared to the
life i took, or just winged it?
there was no joy anymore for me.

Perhaps all 'sin' can be summed up in one word:

"waste".

^~

yes. there are better things to do
than being shot or eaten i'm sure.

none escape the worms

^~

but i'm ever so fresh

"yes. there are better things to do
than being shot or eaten i'm sure."

certainty? 100%?

"better"?

1 - birth(procreation)
2 - eat(consume)& breed(procreate)
3 - death(being consumed)

What else is there?

Is there anything other than
consumption and procreation?

^~

I've been over this. From a point of view
upholding the values of an animal as "life"
the process of life appears rather empty,
hold onto that child inside because when it
is gone you are dead. Dying Animals. Life
continues on and this is by procreation but
the purpose of "breeding" is beyond exist-
ence it's also an evolution of the forms...
and in the forms Light and Life stay fresh.
You appear to be taking the darker pov and
I suppose the emptiness appears "spiritual".
It's a vague matter for me, but it opposes
a far more vibrant view of the universe.

"the purpose of "breeding" is beyond existence
it's also an evolution of the forms...
and in the forms Light and Life stay fresh."

so life is sacred to a purpose of evolution?
given that evolution is better served the greater the
diversity and population, that means there is a definitive
benefit to that purpose(evolution), of having more species
and more animals alive breeding in the purpose of evolution.
in short:
greater biomass + greater biodiversity =
greater advantage to evolution =
a benefit to all life existent and not yet existent

yah..... i like to make things nice
before the bubby gets here, that is
not to say it's beneficial to exist
opposed to not existing but it is to
exist well, versus existing unwell.



more options = advantage/benefit?

is the advancement of evolution a benefit/advantage
for the forms that have not yet come into existence?

^~

once they come into existence?


from where?

^~

i believe in reincarnation. but let's
snip out the vegetarian group. cough.

prior to that? stuff. we come from
stuff that is not organized as beings.
except for the semen i suppose.

prior to everything? it's a mystery?

prior to existence we come from
"prior to existence", if there was
such a thing, assuming so.

i believe in reincarnation, so prior to
physical existence i believe many of us
probably coulda maybe existed already.

then it could well be a benefit or a
suffering to the individual to be born.
in my opinion it isn't either 100%.

by i may be overestimating the standards
of my soul brothers and sisters out thar.