Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Scarlet,
That was a good post.
I think that in order to kill, regardless of the desired endstate (use of the victim for food, taking of their possessions, mere amusement of the agressor), one has to place the life of another at a level not equal to that of their own. This is why I posed the question I posed just a few posts ago. Murder is murder. Is it any less severe if the perpetrator does not eat his/her victim?
Now the act of cannibalism carries a level of taboo that your standard murder does not. But both victims are still lost forever. So what is it about cannibalism that makes it so much more unthinkable?
I really would like to hear others' thoughts on this.
Seems we all know where each of us stand on this issue, and we've had a glimpse into each others' moral value/makeup. I think the "agree to disagree" suggestion is a good one, since it's obvious the two sides here actually think differently. I've seen it on many threads and in "real life" as well. One side may as well be writing in French while the other writes in Finnish, because there will be no convincing anyone of anything different than they felt before the thread was started. Certain things are "hardwired" into each of us (in my opinion). I think this is one of those things.
My will to survive is not as strong as my will to not take another life in anything but self-defense. In my view, that's a prerequisite to understanding "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thus, I would dine on water hemlock before I would kill someone to dine on them, because there IS NO DENYING no matter what angle you approach it, post-structuralist or not, my killing someone is damn sure infringing on that person's liberty. And as long as they are not denying my own liberty, I haven't the right to do it. But as I said, I'm speaking in one language and some are speaking in another language. So, we're more or less just babbling to each other.
In the end, all I can say is Bon Appétit and make a mental note to myself to keep my finger on the AK-47 trigger if anyone looks hungry and a bit "touched" within, say, 50 feet of me.
Scarlet, i never could imagine all foods are gone.. I still can't and so I could not really answer that I would kill a human for food, since food is everywhere, even if it is not in stores...
I have killed game for meats of just about everything legal that swims walks or crawls in New England. Of these since 1987 when a new life style came to me, I have used almost every part of any critter for something else, and i continue to want to learn how to use what I don't yet know, but that isn't very much, since what parts i don't know a better solution for end up in hide glue.
I pray upon any kills, to the critter what ever it is, and even insects get a swift there ya go to yer maker, and become dirt!
If you ask me man has it all wrong with enbalming fluids (toxins) and modern metal boxes that will almost last forever. In the old ways, pine box, scaffold, pyre and etc the body gave something back to Earth, and in time left little to no mark (scars), and in my ways something like that will be what happens, but i am not one to demand that what I do ALL others Must do.
My Prayers go to a entity of an idea and not so much to a God, but the idea are based on early man and 1 god, but maybe not the Christian God. Early peoples tended to use the now modern name Manitoe, and many of the stories are the same, but with different words. Either way i wasn't around to see then, so I just do what i do and i don't find God in any white boxes. In white boxes i find modern man and with all the evil modern man can drag thru the hard wood doors.
I have been judged by modern man and sent him packing.. YOU CAN ASK MY WIFE ABOUT THAT LOL
DAMMED TO HELL THIS CAPS KEY..... in a second i will get very serious with this thing and stuff a match book cover under it for good!
Uh I almost forgot i got judged right here today too! Waugh. I been had but my attitude is DILIGAF...
Strange how many posters went in great detail as to how they would carry it out.
I will give them the benefit of the doubt and believe each poster felt they had to " one up " the previous post to impress their " posting buddies"
Having a backbone is taking a stand that is not popular with the " regulars" and I commend you and Chris for doing so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal
Human history is filled with dark examples. Just because an act exists in human history does not mean it should be acceptable to repeat it. IMO, murdering another human being for the purpose of consuming his/her flesh, as originally proposed by the OP, clearly crosses the line for what is an acceptable form of human behavior. When a person chooses to take that path, he/she ceases to be human (spiritually, mentally, socially) and becomes no more worthy of life than a rabid wild animal, IMO. It is clear many don't agree and draw their line in the sand at a different plane than do I.
Again, I'd pose the question with the assumption that the foundation of preparing/contingency planning/self-sufficiency is not simply to survive but to thrive and rebuild that which has been lost. How does one forge a new social contract and rebuild with those who have deemed murder for the consumption of human flesh as acceptable? Isn't murderous cannibalism the most severe form of sociopathy if not psychopathic behavior?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK-Cathy
I commend you and Chris for doing so.
Add AK-Cathy as noted on page 6 of this discussion and I believe tdk-mom weighed in similarly.
There is a line. I know firmly where it is for myself and for any society I wish to be part of. Mo-gal's quoted commentary directly above is especially pertinent IMO. How to rebuild in the face of something this horrific that breaches social contract bounds and obligations especially if widespread? I don't think any of us are going to persuade folks on the other side. I am shocked, disappointed and sadly wiser from this conversation.
All true. But as I said earlier we are not speaking the same language as they do. We are on a certain "moral playing field" that they are not. My view is that both camps have been hard-wired somewhere along the line, and may to an extent be a highly probable trait, one way or the other, from birth (although I'm certainly up for debating that idea). Some of us have the "morality wiring" and some don't. For those of us who do have it, our best bet is to surround ourselves with like-minded people and defend ourselves against those who don't have compatible "wiring."
In a TEOTWAWKI situation, this is what you are up against. There are many, many people in the general population who place no value on human life. More dangerous by far, though, are the sorts of folks who have responded on this thread who sail under false colors and damn sure have the ability to take you out in the blink of an eye with no remorse or even a second thought.
Ultimately, this brings me back to something I haven't really brought up lately, but I've said it over and over and over... disconnect yourself and get as far away from it all as you possibly can. Make yourself not worth hunting down (and in this thread's case, being eaten). Make it so that the rogue "survivalist" would expend more calories finding you, killing you, and barbecuing you than the intake of calories he/she would get from you. It's a simple calculation for a "survivalist" with crossed wires--you are a number. And if you are an unfavorable number to him/her, it's not that he/she is your friend in leaving you alone, it's that you are a resource that isn't worth the effort to "extract." You're not worth bothering with. The "survivalist" will then find easier targets. Think of it as a pack of hyenas hunting in the field. They will pursue the easiest target. Make yourself either the harder target or, better yet, the unknown target.
That is the scenario the OP posed. The scenario is that all food supply has been depleted. The ultimate SHTF conditions suggest that it would be a very long time before a food supply was restored, other than human, hence the OP's request to avoid zombie remarks even though a zombie scenario was presented. I didn't think the scenario worth consideration either.
Well she was not specific on whether the depletion was temporary or permanent, obviously as I said without some form of "magic" it would be temporary, which is not realistic, if all life is gone then the most likely cause is some endemic form of toxin that would affect all plants and animals similarly (and we're all just the same meatbags at heart as any other mammal).
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarlet_ohara
But this thread has illuminated something else - placing more value on one's life than on the lives of others.
You didn't see it in the logic so I will just state it. You determined that your life would be more valuable than a 9 year old presumably because you could breed and she couldn't. Killing a human so that you may live to produce more of same is illogical.
No I don't know my life is worth more, nor do I know my life is worth less, it's zero sum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarlet_ohara
In order to kill a human for food, one must believe that his/her life is more valuable than the life he/she is taking. I wonder if this goes above and beyond basic survival instinct. To rationalize it the way you and a few others did suggests it goes above and beyond.
No in order to kill for food, one must know that they are hungry, and that there are food animals present. Any other motivations ascribed are entirely speculative on your part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarlet_ohara
We are hardwired to avoid *killing* our own for meals (some more than others apparently) because it is adverse to the survival of the species. It is perfectly natural to be repulsed by the idea, and why so many starving people have not resorted to *killing* for that purpose. Scavenging what is already dead is basic survival instinct. However, some of those who had to scavenge humans in order to survive had trouble coping with it for the rest of their lives because of our hardwiring.
In your opinion, however consider, how many warrior cultures ate the hearts and/or livers of vanquished enemies? How many protein light cultures did cannibalize? If we were hard wired then surely these actions would not have happened, indeed could not have happened. Yet they have, and not just by deviants either, just regular people under extraordinary circumstances. Indeed the fact we have a taboo itself is an indication it's not hardwired, it's sociological software to restrain people acting in a certain way, for instance (as a negative example) if taboo's indicated hard-wiring, then men could not achieve an erection when their mate was in menses, which has been a taboo for many years in many cultures and even today is still "frowned" upon by many men in the Western World. However this is not the case at least physically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarlet_ohara
No one knows what they will do in any given situation, right? So then how does one know - or think it would be OK - if s/he would kill a human for food? If one can determine this in advance, that person already believes his/her life is more valuable than everyone else, regardless of the scenario or circumstances.
I don't but I can entertain the idea and concepts, in the same way I can entertain the idea an concepts of not doing it. You're drawing a conclusion that you cannot support, for two reasons, you're speculating that to kill someone else to survive you believe your life is more valuable than someone else's (and in that it must apply to killing ANYONE under ANY circumstances), so even in self defense. At the time of the event you believe your life is worth more than the person who is attacking you. However how do you know? You cannot possibly, suppose that we're not in such a dire situation as the OP, but you're attacked by a man and a woman, you and your companions kill them in self defense, and continue on your way, leaving those peoples children to die of starvation or predation from others or animals. Now was your life worth more than two adults and two or more children? If you knew that was the price would you have changed your behavior? Would you even consider that a possibility? If that is your belief, then you are accurate for you and others who believe as you, of which I am not one. The same can be applied to Lifelongs statement about how she would "summarily execute" anyone she found killing someone to cannibalize, who else might die because of her actions, a partner, children, an entire community? The possibilities are endless and will drive you insane.
Secondly you're ascribing moral values on me, for statements made as to how I might behave in a hypothetical scenario, as I stated to Redwolf, you have no grounds for making those judgments, you may judge what you consider my hypothetical morals may be in that situation, but you cannot draw a conclusion on my actual morals.
Both of these are faulty logic, to be prepared kill means you wish to survive some event that requires some form of aggressive behavior (and regardless of that aggressive behavior all aggressive behavior can result in a fatality, even loud shouting could cause the subject of the shouting to turn, run, trip and hit their head on a rock, its unlikely but it's possible), and as stated you cannot make any judgments of character on anyone regardless of the side of the argument they're arguing, since it's hypothetical behavior in hypothetical situations.
Indeed it's my very self awareness of the potential for this that may lead me to improve my preparations and redundancy, so that I'm never in the situation where I actually HAVE to make the call. Which is something that you might want to consider. Often the biggest motivator to avoid certain circumstances is the fear of how you will respond in those circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarlet_ohara
I think that is what ChrisC was alluding to - the questionable modern day prepper mindset and philosophy. But I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong about that. It is evident in many of these threads but I guess it took a more extreme example to illuminate it.
Anyway, not much point in hypothesizing the zombie scenario presented in this thread.
Mod warning: Recent posts have begun to border on personal attacks. If this turns into a flame war, violators will be infracted and the thread may be closed.
Cannibal Targeting Internet Vice Squads... you, Granny, have officially earned the most prestigious (and deeply coveted) Tinfoil Full-Body Armor Award
Thank you, Ma'm!!! Glad I could make you smile!
Ah shall try to live up to this honor...
My point was, though, that you cannot make assumptions of anyone from postings they make on an Internet forum... Because they may not be what/who/where/doing what they say they are.
Well she was not specific on whether the depletion was temporary or permanent, obviously as I said without some form of "magic" it would be temporary, which is not realistic, if all life is gone then the most likely cause is some endemic form of toxin that would affect all plants and animals similarly (and we're all just the same meatbags at heart as any other mammal).
No I don't know my life is worth more, nor do I know my life is worth less, it's zero sum.
No in order to kill for food, one must know that they are hungry, and that there are food animals present. Any other motivations ascribed are entirely speculative on your part.
In your opinion, however consider, how many warrior cultures ate the hearts and/or livers of vanquished enemies? How many protein light cultures did cannibalize? If we were hard wired then surely these actions would not have happened, indeed could not have happened. Yet they have, and not just by deviants either, just regular people under extraordinary circumstances. Indeed the fact we have a taboo itself is an indication it's not hardwired, it's sociological software to restrain people acting in a certain way, for instance (as a negative example) if taboo's indicated hard-wiring, then men could not achieve an erection when their mate was in menses, which has been a taboo for many years in many cultures and even today is still "frowned" upon by many men in the Western World. However this is not the case at least physically.
I don't but I can entertain the idea and concepts, in the same way I can entertain the idea an concepts of not doing it. You're drawing a conclusion that you cannot support, for two reasons, you're speculating that to kill someone else to survive you believe your life is more valuable than someone else's (and in that it must apply to killing ANYONE under ANY circumstances), so even in self defense. At the time of the event you believe your life is worth more than the person who is attacking you. However how do you know? You cannot possibly, suppose that we're not in such a dire situation as the OP, but you're attacked by a man and a woman, you and your companions kill them in self defense, and continue on your way, leaving those peoples children to die of starvation or predation from others or animals. Now was your life worth more than two adults and two or more children? If you knew that was the price would you have changed your behavior? Would you even consider that a possibility? If that is your belief, then you are accurate for you and others who believe as you, of which I am not one. The same can be applied to Lifelongs statement about how she would "summarily execute" anyone she found killing someone to cannibalize, who else might die because of her actions, a partner, children, an entire community? The possibilities are endless and will drive you insane.
Secondly you're ascribing moral values on me, for statements made as to how I might behave in a hypothetical scenario, as I stated to Redwolf, you have no grounds for making those judgments, you may judge what you consider my hypothetical morals may be in that situation, but you cannot draw a conclusion on my actual morals.
Both of these are faulty logic, to be prepared kill means you wish to survive some event that requires some form of aggressive behavior (and regardless of that aggressive behavior all aggressive behavior can result in a fatality, even loud shouting could cause the subject of the shouting to turn, run, trip and hit their head on a rock, its unlikely but it's possible), and as stated you cannot make any judgments of character on anyone regardless of the side of the argument they're arguing, since it's hypothetical behavior in hypothetical situations.
Indeed it's my very self awareness of the potential for this that may lead me to improve my preparations and redundancy, so that I'm never in the situation where I actually HAVE to make the call. Which is something that you might want to consider. Often the biggest motivator to avoid certain circumstances is the fear of how you will respond in those circumstances.
Excellent! That is what I was doing, not ascribing moral values. Moral debates are timewasters. I think it is an inherent trait, not morality.
If we didn't place some value on our own lives, what would be the point. The question is to what degree is that inherent. Is there some point where it crosses over into something else.
I don't think hunger is the only motivator because if it were, nobody would starve to death while there are people around to kill and consume. If we didn't have some kind of filter to be repulsed by viewing our species as food, I think we might have become extinct. It is adverse to the survival of any species.
While you can hypothesize that you could kill someone for food, you don't really know until faced with the situation. If that filter doesn't kick in, then you are faced with making a conscious decision that your survival is more valuable than the victim's. IMO. I view that as a fact, not a judgment, either moral or otherwise.
YMMV
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
