I meant instinct, my grammar error sorry. Stop with the ad-hominem attacks though, it's really annoying.

Torturing is an act under free will, they CHOOSE to torture for a reason. (Sometimes self gratification, sometimes under order, etc). That isn't even relevant.

You're right though, a moral person would know that it is right or wrong, I certainly do And I hope you do too

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Jun 18 2014 09:26am

What's the difference between a dog mauling a child and a human mauling a child? Both can choose not do it, but they do it anyway.

That's untrue. A dog will instinctively maul a little child, baby, rat, cat, anything regardless of thinking. Humans are moral beings which can choose between right and wrong. That is why I believe dog's are not moral beings. How is that worldview by the way, seemed to be so DESPISED by you?

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Jun 18 2014 09:36am

you seem to think that dogs only have instinct to guide them which is completely wrong.

dogs have the ability to problem solve and learn and with those abilities comes the ability to have a moral code.

observing dog behaviors has shown them to be more complex than just "oh they are playing" or "oh they are sleeping beside each other"

you don't know near enough about dogs to be passing any judgements on them.

Okay, you tell that to the parents of the 6 year old that was slaughtered by a pit.




And you do?


You playing the picture game? I cannot post graphic pictures of dog attacks on d2jsp, sorry.

I have a dog, and I love him. I am all for pets, but theres a difference between animals and moral beings. (humans)

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Jun 18 2014 03:21pm

cause morality is universal right?

much like god there are lots of views on morality.

the only difference is your dog isn't sitting on the internet making grand claims out of ignorance. this is the science subforum..not the opinion subforum.

he provided observable data that dogs don't rely only on instinct because if they did they would be killing that pig whenever they became hungry.

so again...get some evidence on your side or stop posting because even anecdotal evidence is better than no evidence.

This so hard

You are obviously wrong, because millions of people have a dog and a small child. If killing the child was instinctual, then most of these dogs would kill the child they live with.

The fact that very few dogs attack children obviously means it's not done on instinct.

If the act of killing is immoral, then your claim that morals are inherent in humans is false, since we kill each other all the time over petty shit. Alternatively, if people can have morals and still kill, so can animals.

Also, he's not the one making claims about the cognitive limits of animals. He's calling you out on yours.



What argument would you support with pictures of dog attacks? It's like you saw the dogs behaving nicely and you were like "a picture of a dog attack would invalidate that!"

Let me be clear, I'm not saying dogs attacks don't happen. Now, I will forgive this misunderstanding and will await your newly crafted response to the evidence I presented in my previous post.

This post was edited by Queso on Jun 18 2014 05:26pm