• Welcome to ScubaBoard

  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Can we take things from the ocean?

Discussion in 'Basic Scuba' started by Jinglebells0518, Jul 21, 2021 at 11:43 AM.

  1. uncfnp

    uncfnp Solo Diver ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: North Carolina
    OMG. I am speechless! Maybe English is your second language and you don’t quite grasp the concepts of the terms you are using?

    BTW Have you ever visited a slaughterhouse? Seen live chickens transported to production? If you don’t have the balls to harvest your own food I guess you do have to rely on someone else to do your dirty work.
    2TH DIVR, Bob DBF, Kha and 3 others like this.
  2. Ucarkus

    Ucarkus Contributor

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Berlin, Germany
    I do not eat fish, that is not a relevant dilemma for me. Fisher does what he does to provide his family for food/shelter. A person who has another job to feed him self and his family but chooses to kill living animals for thrill is what I am looking down.

    Actually I am not interested in defending my view, so you can all spare your breath.

    Ethical hedonism
    Ethical hedonism or normative hedonism, as defined here, is the thesis that considerations of increasing pleasure and decreasing pain determine what we should do or which action is right.[2] However, it is sometimes defined in a wider sense in terms of intrinsic value, in which case it includes axiological hedonism as defined below.[15][1] It is different from psychological hedonism since it prescribes rather than describes our behavior. In the narrow sense, ethical hedonism is a form of consequentialism since it determines the rightness of an action based on its consequences, which are measured here in terms of pleasure and pain.[14] As such, it is subject to the main arguments in favor and against consequentialism. On the positive side, these include the intuition that the consequences of our actions matter and that through them we ought to make the world a better place.[18] On the negative side, consequentialism would entail that we rarely if ever know right from wrong since our knowledge of the future is rather limited and the consequences of even simple actions may be vast.[19] As a form of hedonism, it has some initial intuitive appeal since pleasure and pain seem to be relevant to how we should act.[2] But it has been argued that it is morally objectable to see pleasure and pain as the only factors relevant to what we should do since this position seems to ignore, for example, values of justice, friendship and truth.[14][2] Ethical hedonism is usually concerned with both pleasure and pain. But the more restricted version in the form of negative consequentialism or negative utilitarianism focuses only on reducing suffering.[1][20][21][22] Ethical hedonism is said to have been started by Aristippus of Cyrene, who held the idea that pleasure is the highest good.[23][24]

    Ethical hedonist theories can be classified in relation to whose pleasure should be increased. According to the egoist version, each agent should only aim at maximizing her own pleasure. This position is usually not held in very high esteem.[25][2] Altruist theories, commonly known by the term "classical utilitarianism", are more respectable in the philosophical community. They hold that the agent should maximize the sum-total of everyone's happiness.[26][2] This sum-total includes the agent's pleasure as well, but only as one factor among many. A common objection against utilitarianism is that it is too demanding.[27][28] This is most pronounced in cases where the agent has to sacrifice his own happiness in order to promote someone else's happiness. For example, various commentators have directed this argument against Peter Singer's position, who suggests along similar lines that the right thing to do for most people living in developed countries would be to donate a significant portion of their income to charities, which appears overly demanding to many.[29][30] Singer justifies his position by pointing out that the suffering that can be avoided in third world countries this way considerably outweighs the pleasure gained from how the money would be spent otherwise.[31] Another important objection to utilitarianism is that it disregards the personal nature of moral duties, for example, that it may be more important to promote the happiness of those close to us, e.g. of our family and friends, even if the alternative course of actions would result in slightly more happiness for a stranger.[32]
  3. Tripp

    Tripp Aquanaut Naturalist ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I'm a Fish!
    Location: San Antonio & Marco Island
  4. agilis

    agilis Cat Lives Matter

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: N.J.
    Largely irrelevant grossly excessive copy and paste with typically Germanic verbosity. Ausfuhrlichkeit.
    lowviz likes this.
  5. 100days-a-year

    100days-a-year Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: NE Florida
    Yeah, you guys looking down on others has not worked out well historically. I notice you're writing in English on an American forum

    But thanks for the sequal to War and Peace you wrote to defend the viewpoint you refuse to defend.
  6. Jcp2

    Jcp2 Literally virtually diving ScubaBoard Supporter

    I'm just happy with my juvenile horseshoe crab shell with all working little feet.
    agilis and Bob DBF like this.
  7. Ana

    Ana Solo Diver

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Pompano Beach, FL
    Add me to the list of hedonist people.

    I get very excited when I manage to come onboard with dinner, I also get excited when is my husband the one that comes up with dinner. Even after decades doing it, each time I catch a lobster is a reason to celebrate and be grateful . Never felt that way at a market, granted I do love real fish markets.

    Sometimes I take empty shells, if they don't already have a resident crab.

    I also play with mantis shrimp, some lucky days I can caress the underside of a flounder with the barb of the spear. I consider a privilege when I get to pet jewfish without making them boom.

    At the same time I regularly remove quite a bit of garbage at depth, mid water column and also floating around.

    I'd be happy to compare my carbon foot-print with any of the people that claim superiority from touch or removing nothing.
    Bob DBF, Johnoly, uncfnp and 2 others like this.
  8. Soloist

    Soloist Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: North Carolina
    Self-righteous: convinced of one's own righteousness especially in contrast with the actions and beliefs of others : narrow-mindedly moralistic
    Ana, Bob DBF and scubadada like this.
  9. lowviz

    lowviz Solo Diver ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Northern Delaware or the New Jersey Turnpike
    Understood, Jagermeister.

    This world is a massively complex confusion of needs/wants/wishes. I can not leaf-out and create my own food. You are a vegetarian? So you are a parasite on the very life-form that you hold in highest esteem?
    Ana, Bob DBF, Marie13 and 1 other person like this.
  10. mac64

    mac64 Contributor

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Ireland
    Id like to see more wrecks properly preserved, but for some reason the so called “looters” are always more enthusiastic and willing to put in the effort than the conservationists. I think if the conservationists did half the work of the looters quite a few wrecks would be preserved.
    Bob DBF likes this.

Share This Page