![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 12 of 12. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by so on May 24, 2005, at 23:44:35
The mention at this site of Internet hunting reminded me that it is now an available service, and having been reminded of it here and my impression of the service shaped by how it is characterized here, I plan at my earliest convenience to subscribe to an Internet hunting service linked to a Texas game preserve.
But along with my increased interest in Internet hunting, I have a growing awareness that I don't understand how the following statements fit in the context of the listed terms and policies of this site.
"What a farce" http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/498173.html
"it is a terrible idea", (when on the same day someone had been chastened for calling recruitment of suicide bombers "monsterous")
hunters were characterized as "swilling brews and belching in your boxers",
a comparison suggested the logic that humans' tooth structure evidences carnivourous ancestory is akin to saying men should be allowed to rape women because they are stronger,
Posted by Gabbi-x-2 on May 25, 2005, at 2:28:34
In reply to Things I don't understand, posted by so on May 24, 2005, at 23:44:35
>
> But along with my increased interest in Internet hunting, I have a growing awareness that I don't understand how the following statements fit in the context of the listed terms and policies of this site.
>
> "What a farce" http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/498173.html
>
> "it is a terrible idea", (when on the same day someone had been chastened for calling recruitment of suicide bombers "monsterous")They seem to similar statements, for sure.
>
> hunters were characterized as "swilling brews and belching in your boxers",I don't find either appealing, but I don't really understand why internet hunting is any worse than ordering in a chicken dinner.
Except that with the former, the animal probably led a far better life before it died.
Posted by AuntieMel on May 25, 2005, at 14:09:07
In reply to Things I don't understand, posted by so on May 24, 2005, at 23:44:35
>>>> hunters were characterized as "swilling brews and belching in your boxers",
Actually, I did *not* describe hunters that way.I said with *Internet* hunting you *can* shoot animals while in that state.
Posted by so on May 25, 2005, at 14:58:22
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand » so, posted by AuntieMel on May 25, 2005, at 14:09:07
> >>>> hunters were characterized as "swilling brews and belching in your boxers",
>
>
> Actually, I did *not* describe hunters that way.
>
> I said with *Internet* hunting you *can* shoot animals while in that state.My understanding is not advanced having read the clarification. The hunters so described were potential hunters, but they were nonetheless hunters in the rhetorical context and were so described. The only potential hunters mentioned in that post are described as potentially "swilling brews and belching in their boxers". The post plainly logs disapproval for those hypothetical hunters who consume alcohol, belch or wear a particular style of undergarment while engaging in a legal hunting activity.
It raises the question whether the hunters would find any more approval if they were dressed in their Sunday best and drinking iced tea.
Posted by AuntieMel on May 25, 2005, at 15:30:38
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand » AuntieMel, posted by so on May 25, 2005, at 14:58:22
I don't know if I would like them any better if they were dressed to the nines.
I'm much more familiar with beer guzzling belchers.
At any rate, my approval doesn't matter. The only thing that counts here was my adherence to the civility rules.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 25, 2005, at 15:59:04
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand » so, posted by AuntieMel on May 25, 2005, at 15:30:38
AuntieMel.
In fact (((AuntieMel)))
(I hope thats ok).At least with the written word you can check misunderstandings back against the original post.
It would be nice if people tried to get clear on meaning before requesting civility determinations...
But there it is.
I didn't see anything wrong with your post :-)
I appreciated chatting to you
And I'm sorry you were finding me a little annoying over there...
Posted by AuntieMel on May 25, 2005, at 16:34:55
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand » AuntieMel, posted by alexandra_k on May 25, 2005, at 15:59:04
You weren't annoying me - it just came up when I was busy and didn't have time to keep up with it.
Actually I have very conflicted feelings about hunting. I could never personally do it - I'm way, way too soft. But I know people who hunt and they aren't cruel bad people.
To me there are so many shades of grey about this issue. I would disagree with anyone that saw it as black and white - on either side.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 25, 2005, at 18:35:56
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on May 25, 2005, at 16:34:55
> You weren't annoying me - it just came up when I was busy and didn't have time to keep up with it.
:-)
Yeah, I know that feeling. Sometimes I start a topic and then it kind of takes off and I can't keep up with it... I was just worried I had offended or annoyed you. I care about you and your opinion. We have had some good discussions. I just hoped I hadn't lost you.> Actually I have very conflicted feelings about hunting. I could never personally do it - I'm way, way too soft. But I know people who hunt and they aren't cruel bad people.
I never said, or meant to say, or even mean to imply that they were cruel bad people.
My sole interest in the matter was whether it was logically inconsistent to consider certain practices acceptable and certain other practices unacceptable.
I meant to do it in the spirit of 'I am having trouble seeing differences' and was hoping somebody might be able to.
Like I said: I eat meat. I think I am being logically inconsistent in doing so - and in a way I was hoping someone might be able to show me a way out of the inconsistency.
I didn't mean for people to take it personally.
Now I remember why it is that I don't want to tutor first year ethics.
Ethical discussions become personal and people take it personally and can resort to personal attacks.I don't think I attacked anyone...
But maybe it is just the inconsistency point...
I should remember...
Socrates was forced to drink hemlock...
One mustn't become toooooooooo much of a gadfly...
> To me there are so many shades of grey about this issue. I would disagree with anyone that saw it as black and white - on either side.I was just interested in the matter of consistency...
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2005, at 2:53:26
In reply to Things I don't understand, posted by so on May 24, 2005, at 23:44:35
> > What a farce
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/498173.html
She apologized after that...
> > it is a terrible idea
Sorry, it looks like your post was cut off, can you give me a link to that one?
Bob
Posted by so on May 26, 2005, at 12:27:42
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand, posted by Dr. Bob on May 26, 2005, at 2:53:26
> Sorry, it looks like your post was cut off, can you give me a link to that one?
>
> Bob"a terrible terrible idea" "heh, heh" (same post, laughter apparently directed at the reasoning of people who think it is a terrible idea, but for reasons with which the writer disagrees)
>> I believe that it *is* natural for humans to eat meat, and this is proven to me by the structure of our teeth.
>That looks a lot similar to this:
>I believe that is is natural for males to use physical force to control (rape) females as this is proven to me by the fact that males (tend to be) bigger than females.http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/499697.html
>I think it is over the top to set up feeders to lure in the animal.>Even worse is spraying the area with female urine to attract the males.
Some of us hunt, and we use these legal technique, in part to give us a more direct, lethal shot with black-powder or a bow.
>"I personally think internet hunting is sick."
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/499484.html
is this much differnet than:
> > > The benzo.org.uk crowd leans on the border of quackery as far as I'm concerned.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20050521/msgs/501186.htmlIf internet hunting is characterized as sick, or routine bow-hunting practices as over-the-top, the people who do those things could feel put down. The pattern follows later in the thread, where a post implies certain practices are necessary to "have the decency". I'm not the only hunter who noticed the thread.
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 28, 2005, at 12:06:55
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand, posted by so on May 26, 2005, at 12:27:42
> > it looks like your post was cut off, can you give me a link to that one?
>
> same postOh, sorry. Again, she did apologize.
> > I personally think internet hunting is sick.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/499484.html
>
> is this much differnet than:
>
> > > > The benzo.org.uk crowd leans on the border of quackery as far as I'm concerned.
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20050521/msgs/501186.htmlNo, if there are Internet hunters here, then it's not much different...
Bob
Posted by so on May 28, 2005, at 13:58:04
In reply to Re: Things I don't understand, posted by Dr. Bob on May 28, 2005, at 12:06:55
> Oh, sorry. Again, she did apologize.Fair enough. In time, there were mutual efforts to reach understandings of several aspects of the exchange. Asynchrony allows time for these things, but your various response times, perhaps mitigated by your personal needs outside this forum, can add to the confusion for members.
> > > I personally think internet hunting is sick.
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050509/msgs/499484.html
> >
> > is this much differnet than:
> >
> > > > > The benzo.org.uk crowd leans on the border of quackery as far as I'm concerned.
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20050521/msgs/501186.html
>
> No, if there are Internet hunters here, then it's not much different...
>
> BobBut it seems there are circumstances where you cite possible offensiveness against people who are not involved in the forum.
Here, http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20050510/msgs/497534.html , you reacted critically to someone who called recruitment of suicide bombers in the US monsterous, but nobody here is recruiting suicide bombers.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.