Quote:
Quote by: The Bacon Guy  But I very much doubt he’s ever said every societal trend will continue indefinitely simply based on it being a trend. The fact that he says past behaviour can be used to predict future behaviour on an individual level and also happens to mention societal trends does not mean that the former observation applies to the latter field of study.
If the premise is false, the conclusion is also.
You saying that you believe a trend will continue doesn’t constitute proof that it will.
So your argument is based on religion. That speaks for itself.
Then you can pass a law against it. Still no reason to ban hunting itself.
If the deer are straying out of their habitat onto ours, then the wolves are clearly not keeping them under control.
And we can solve it by keeping the deer population under control.
Your OP asked why hunting in the Western world is necessary.
Our property is no longer their habitat; it’s ours. If they destroy our property, we have every right to stop them.
It’s necessary to keep the deer population under control, and hunting is a perfectly valid way of doing this. |
He has never said all trends, but he does comment that most trends that have been happening for a while will continue.
No, the conclusion makes the sentence make sense, and by cutting out half the sentence, I guess you don't want it to make sense so it is easier to comment on.
How is my arguement based on religion? Look at my previous posts. It is based on what is better for nature and the animals.
Do you understand what 'population control' is? If some deer come onto 'our' land, that does not mean the cougars and wolves are not doing a good enough job. It means the deer are just moving about grazing, like they would have before we came here. You can't expect an animal to say "Oh, this is human land, I better go back into the bush".
Deer eating our gardens or walking in the local park does not mean they are overpopulated. So if we re-introduce wolves and cougars, they bring them down to levels where no deer is starving, everything is good, even if they go eat our gardens or walk around in the local park. Since, if you remember, the meaning of the word overpopulated, deer would no longer be technically overpopulated, since they aren't starved.
They don't know it is our property, do they? They would normally roam around across North America, and we are restricting them greatly. So we should not kill them just because they are on 'our' property. Unless you believe deer have the mental capacity we do, then they would know, and it would be then illegal to hunt them.
Hunting may sometimes work at keeping the population down of deer, but it is no way necessary. See dictionary meaning:
being essential, indispensable, or requisite: a necessary part of the motor.
Hunting is not necessary, since I have proven re-introducing natural predators could work too (it may be more money, but it would work).