Gratitude, Compulsion, Idiocy or Nobility?

[fuelair]

Yawn! At it again I see!!

 

[Kumar]

Since when was a bird not an animal?

They don't know they are bound for slaughter, but they do know where they were fed. End of thread.

Even then, others are slaughtered in front of them, still their behavior seems not change.

 

[Kumar]

How are the animals supposed to know there are to be slaughtered? Can they read?

As told,

Even then, others are slaughtered in front of them, still their behavior seems not change.

 

[Kumar]

They go to where they know there is food. They don't know that they are destined for slaughter.

As I said,

Even then, others are slaughtered in front of them, still their behavior seems not change.

I think, similar observations can also be felt in case of botanical beings. They go on offering their products(all parts) by new growth inspite of fact, all parts are cut/plucked and used by humans.

I can't say, whether it is nature or otherwise.

 

[Kumar]

This is one of the prime examples of anthropomorphic personification that one commonly sees. None of it's proponents ever think it through to it's logical conclusion.

I feel, it only happen in human to species used for human food. I think, animal to animal it does not happen.

 

[Kumar]

None of the above. Every organism instinctively seeks out what it needs to stay alive. As is obvious -- but seems to require being pointed out to you -- animals that have previously experienced food and shelter at a particular location will return to that location in order to keep receiving food and shelter. As is further obvious -- but somehow also needs to be explained to you -- these animals have no idea they are in any danger, hence the instinct to flee from danger is not triggered.

The options you give above presume a highly developed consciousness that isn't relevant to the subjects of your question. You are personifying animals as the premise to asking your question.

Thanks but I think. as I said;

1. It still happen even if animal see other animals are slaughtered in front of them.

2. I think, it happens in interactions between humans and such species used for food not between animal to animals interactions.

Do they expect something different from humans?

 

[Kumar]

There is a certain symmetrical irony, I think, in the fact that the person who can't see the obvious answer here is the same person who keeps getting (metaphorically) slaughtered on this forum, yet keeps coming back to the house of those who feed him. Gratitude(to repay), Compulsion, Idiocy or Nobility?

Good example. Therefore, I am trying to better understand it. Personally, I feel it is gratitude and nature to get and give i.e to share but not only to get or only to give.. Bit different.

 

[bruto]

As I said,

Even then, others are slaughtered in front of them, still their behavior seems not change.

I think, similar observations can also be felt in case of botanical beings. They go on offering their products(all parts) by new growth inspite of fact, all parts are cut/plucked and used by humans.

I can't say, whether it is nature or otherwise.

Oh really, now how silly can we get? "Botanical Beings" indeed. Theyre plants. Plants don't "offer their products" to anyone. They grow because that's what plants do. Of course they grow back if they can. What would you expect a plant to do? Stop growing out of spite? Grow legs and run away? In fiction ents and triffids can maybe vary the routine, but in real life, plants are plants.

What possible thing other than nature could plant growth be? If a plant does it, it's nature by default! That's what nature is!

 

[Kumar]

So this one implies they know they would be killed but are coming back because they think it's a way to repay the food and shelter they were given. This would require knowing that returning would result in them being slaughtered (nope) thinking that that death would repay a past debt (nope again) and being able to even think in those kinds of terms in the first place (also nope).



I guess this one partly depends on what you're suggesting compels them? If you're just saying it was instinct, well, virtually anything that an animal does can be chalked up to instinct if we want.



I wouldn't call it idiocy, but I would say (as everyone else has) that they probably don't have any idea that they're going to be slaughtered. I guess out of the four options that fits 'idiocy' best.



This is the one I'm most curious about. I genuinely have no idea what this could possibly mean. I'd love some clarification.

It need to be checked under following things.

1. They come back, even if they look other animals are slaughtered in front of them.

2. Is it humans to those animal interactions or animal to animal also and if not, do they expect some more naturally from humans?

3. Can it just be their nature in the benefit of humans?

 

[Loss Leader]

I think, similar observations can also be felt in case of botanical beings. They go on offering their products(all parts) by new growth inspite of fact, all parts are cut/plucked and used by humans.

What would you like the plants to do?

 

[Kumar]

Oh really, now how silly can we get? "Botanical Beings" indeed. Theyre plants. Plants don't "offer their products" to anyone. They grow because that's what plants do. Of course they grow back if they can. What would you expect a plant to do? Stop growing out of spite? Grow legs and run away? In fiction ents and triffids can maybe vary the routine, but in real life, plants are plants.

What possible thing other than nature could plant growth be? If a plant does it, it's nature by default! That's what nature is!

Yes, but from our POV, we should also see, what we are getting and what we are forcibly taking.

 

[Kumar]

It's because they think it's where the female goats, cows and chickens are.

or they take us bit differently being seiner most? Probably they believe more to us esp if no similar animal to animal interaction is there?

 

[Kumar]

I have been well-served for many years by the maxim that if your original assumptions are questionable, your conclusions won't be very useful.

I also want to check if those animals, birds and even botanical, naturally take us bit differently, being seiner most?

 

[Kumar]

What ARE you writing/talking about?

What is the premise of such a question?

I am checking, if those species which are slaughtered in human's use but also nurshed by them, naturally take human beings bit differently due to flowwing reasons:

1. Being seiner most?

2. One who nurse will not kill?

Esp, if no such type of interaction exist between animal to animals.

 

[Kumar]

Douglas Adams wrote about that kind of animal:

I feel, none in topic subject, nor the ñature, but it càn be mistaken identity to ús like eldest brother, guardian or parent type. Somewhat overestimate/overbelief that whoever nurse n love or who is senier will not kill. ?

 

[Kumar]

What would you like the plants to do?

Both animals and plants are béings. I casually mentioned plants. This point I shall take úp in another topic later. Tks.

 

[Mojo]

What would you like the plants to do?

Form a trade union.

 

[Mojo]

I am checking, if those species which are slaughtered in human's use but also nurshed by them, naturally take human beings bit differently due to flowwing reasons:

1. Being seiner most?

What does "seiner" mean?

2. One who nurse will not kill?

Esp, if no such type of interaction exist between animal to animals.

Animals often kill other animals.

 

[John Jones]

Hello all,

Many animals & birds which are meant to be slaughtered for food, even if set free, come back to the house of those who nursed but will ultimately slaughter them. Eg. Male goats, cows, cocks etc.

Is it their Gratitude(to repay), Compulsion, Idiocy or Nobility?

Best wishes

That's an amazingly stupid question.

 

[John Jones]

I also want to check if those animals, birds and even botanical, naturally take us bit differently, being seiner most?

Please translate this gibberish into a known Earth language.