▲ 194 ▼ Is jellyfish vegan? (lemmy.world) submitted 3 years ago by Cortell@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world 268 comments fedilink hide all child comments They don’t have a brain really and kinda just float there. Do they even feel pain?
[+] merde@sh.itjust.works -6 points 3 years ago (3 children) plants are not "creatures", neither are animals. both are indeed living evolutures ;) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] hglman@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 years ago (1 child) Do you often write in HTML? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 years ago there was something wrong about formatting. Without the HTML code my lines were all huddled into one long line 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) How would you define creature? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] oSillyScope@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) The word creature is theistic. The person you're responding to is being pedantic, but isn't wrong. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Thank you for the definition. I think it is wrong. But i appreciate it nonetheless. My reasoning is that, while it may have started as a theistic word, it isn’t anymore. When someone says it i don’t think “a creation of God” i just think of like, an animal. Definitions change over time. permalink fedilink source parent [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 years ago thank you :) permalink fedilink source parent [+] marmo7ade@lemmy.world -6 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] such_lettuce7970@kbin.social 11 points 3 years ago (1 child) This fact is extremely inconvenient to vegans. A person who eats meat is responsible for more plant consumption than a person who eats vegan. Livestock don't live on sunshine and air you know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago The only true way is to live exclusively off of mushrooms or mushroom fed livestock. That way NO plants will be harmed. (The fungus deserves it, so no moral compunctions) permalink fedilink source parent [–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I always remember that plant in Japan that was hooked up to a computer that would get sad if no one talked to it, but will be full of excited energy anytime someone spoke to it. Now I apologise to a tree if I need to take a leak on it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) do you know what anthropomorphism is? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 6 points 3 years ago* Yeah I do, I anthropomorphise everything lol, I apologized to my door for bumping it with my wood trollie yesterday. It might not have feelings, but I do and I felt bad. permalink fedilink source parent [+] merde@sh.itjust.works -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) my comment was about the word "creature" which implies a creator. It's understandable that it may be difficult to classify living beings if the criteria is "behavior" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I don't think anyone other than you thinks the word "creature" implies a creator, so you making that distinction really only gives power to creationists rather than taking it away. Moreover, even if it does come from creatura, the argument can easily be made that creatures beget (create) other creatures. It seems a very silly and tenuous thing to suddenly muddle a conversation over. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 years ago how do you know what everyone thinks? "beget" doesn't mean "create". i don't muddle the conversation. Creationism is related fundamentally to any conversation about vegetarianism, veganism, speciesism &c. Ask Abraham. He knows. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 years ago (1 child) Do you often write in HTML? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 years ago there was something wrong about formatting. Without the HTML code my lines were all huddled into one long line 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 years ago there was something wrong about formatting. Without the HTML code my lines were all huddled into one long line 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) How would you define creature? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] oSillyScope@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) The word creature is theistic. The person you're responding to is being pedantic, but isn't wrong. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Thank you for the definition. I think it is wrong. But i appreciate it nonetheless. My reasoning is that, while it may have started as a theistic word, it isn’t anymore. When someone says it i don’t think “a creation of God” i just think of like, an animal. Definitions change over time. permalink fedilink source parent [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 years ago thank you :) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] oSillyScope@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) The word creature is theistic. The person you're responding to is being pedantic, but isn't wrong. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Thank you for the definition. I think it is wrong. But i appreciate it nonetheless. My reasoning is that, while it may have started as a theistic word, it isn’t anymore. When someone says it i don’t think “a creation of God” i just think of like, an animal. Definitions change over time. permalink fedilink source parent [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 years ago thank you :) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Thank you for the definition. I think it is wrong. But i appreciate it nonetheless. My reasoning is that, while it may have started as a theistic word, it isn’t anymore. When someone says it i don’t think “a creation of God” i just think of like, an animal. Definitions change over time. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] marmo7ade@lemmy.world -6 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] such_lettuce7970@kbin.social 11 points 3 years ago (1 child) This fact is extremely inconvenient to vegans. A person who eats meat is responsible for more plant consumption than a person who eats vegan. Livestock don't live on sunshine and air you know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago The only true way is to live exclusively off of mushrooms or mushroom fed livestock. That way NO plants will be harmed. (The fungus deserves it, so no moral compunctions) permalink fedilink source parent [–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I always remember that plant in Japan that was hooked up to a computer that would get sad if no one talked to it, but will be full of excited energy anytime someone spoke to it. Now I apologise to a tree if I need to take a leak on it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) do you know what anthropomorphism is? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 6 points 3 years ago* Yeah I do, I anthropomorphise everything lol, I apologized to my door for bumping it with my wood trollie yesterday. It might not have feelings, but I do and I felt bad. permalink fedilink source parent [+] merde@sh.itjust.works -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) my comment was about the word "creature" which implies a creator. It's understandable that it may be difficult to classify living beings if the criteria is "behavior" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I don't think anyone other than you thinks the word "creature" implies a creator, so you making that distinction really only gives power to creationists rather than taking it away. Moreover, even if it does come from creatura, the argument can easily be made that creatures beget (create) other creatures. It seems a very silly and tenuous thing to suddenly muddle a conversation over. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 years ago how do you know what everyone thinks? "beget" doesn't mean "create". i don't muddle the conversation. Creationism is related fundamentally to any conversation about vegetarianism, veganism, speciesism &c. Ask Abraham. He knows. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] such_lettuce7970@kbin.social 11 points 3 years ago (1 child) This fact is extremely inconvenient to vegans. A person who eats meat is responsible for more plant consumption than a person who eats vegan. Livestock don't live on sunshine and air you know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago The only true way is to live exclusively off of mushrooms or mushroom fed livestock. That way NO plants will be harmed. (The fungus deserves it, so no moral compunctions) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] simplecyphers@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago The only true way is to live exclusively off of mushrooms or mushroom fed livestock. That way NO plants will be harmed. (The fungus deserves it, so no moral compunctions) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I always remember that plant in Japan that was hooked up to a computer that would get sad if no one talked to it, but will be full of excited energy anytime someone spoke to it. Now I apologise to a tree if I need to take a leak on it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) do you know what anthropomorphism is? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 6 points 3 years ago* Yeah I do, I anthropomorphise everything lol, I apologized to my door for bumping it with my wood trollie yesterday. It might not have feelings, but I do and I felt bad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) do you know what anthropomorphism is? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 6 points 3 years ago* Yeah I do, I anthropomorphise everything lol, I apologized to my door for bumping it with my wood trollie yesterday. It might not have feelings, but I do and I felt bad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hobo@lzrprt.sbs 6 points 3 years ago* Yeah I do, I anthropomorphise everything lol, I apologized to my door for bumping it with my wood trollie yesterday. It might not have feelings, but I do and I felt bad. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] merde@sh.itjust.works -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) my comment was about the word "creature" which implies a creator. It's understandable that it may be difficult to classify living beings if the criteria is "behavior" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I don't think anyone other than you thinks the word "creature" implies a creator, so you making that distinction really only gives power to creationists rather than taking it away. Moreover, even if it does come from creatura, the argument can easily be made that creatures beget (create) other creatures. It seems a very silly and tenuous thing to suddenly muddle a conversation over. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 years ago how do you know what everyone thinks? "beget" doesn't mean "create". i don't muddle the conversation. Creationism is related fundamentally to any conversation about vegetarianism, veganism, speciesism &c. Ask Abraham. He knows. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I don't think anyone other than you thinks the word "creature" implies a creator, so you making that distinction really only gives power to creationists rather than taking it away. Moreover, even if it does come from creatura, the argument can easily be made that creatures beget (create) other creatures. It seems a very silly and tenuous thing to suddenly muddle a conversation over. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] merde@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 years ago how do you know what everyone thinks? "beget" doesn't mean "create". i don't muddle the conversation. Creationism is related fundamentally to any conversation about vegetarianism, veganism, speciesism &c. Ask Abraham. He knows. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 years ago how do you know what everyone thinks? "beget" doesn't mean "create". i don't muddle the conversation. Creationism is related fundamentally to any conversation about vegetarianism, veganism, speciesism &c. Ask Abraham. He knows. permalink fedilink source parent