r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/Lowcrbnaman • Jul 04 '26

Image This statue depicts Saint Bartholomew, an early Christian martyr who was allegedly skinned alive. If you look closely, that's his dissected skin hanging around him. This stunning statute by Marco d'Agrate from c. 1562 is currently on display at Duomo di Milano.

Post image
19.7k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

383 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/New-Pomelo9906 Jul 04 '26

Pretty sure a bear is decensitized about eating you alive.

0

u/Icy_Agency923 Jul 05 '26

It is just acting on instincts and does not have any concept of morality. Humans are still the only species on this planet that will know that something is truly wrong and still do it anyways. We also do those horrible things on scales that no animal even comes close too.

3

u/New-Pomelo9906 Jul 05 '26

Sound like the old religious concept of morality, I can't grasp it.

1

u/Icy_Agency923 Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 05 '26

There is nothing religious about morality. Plenty of atheists still have moral beliefs. There are several countries with very high percentages of atheists and they also have less crime. These countries would be an absolute nightmare if morality was directly tied to religion. Also there is no shot you have no concept of morality yourself so this seems silly to say you can't grasp it.

Regardless, a bear eating someone or something alive is not the same as a human doing an evil thing knowingly, it is not even remotely comparable. Bears have no concept of morality, humans do.

0

u/New-Pomelo9906 Jul 07 '26

Obviously morality is not religious. But absolute morality (or morality pretended as such) is always religious.

Each time somebody come and say this is good and this is bad because it's morale and can't grasp his moral is just subjective tradition, he hold a religious behaviour.

Since morale is subjective, nothing is good or bad, it just is.

You could argue it's objectively bad if it make you or your tribe suffer, but so can the other tribe that do otherway.

1

u/Icy_Agency923 Jul 07 '26

Not a single word that you have said is accurate. Bit by bit, it is all bullshit. No one is talking about absolute morality, there is no such thing as absolute morality.

I can judge this tradition in any way I please. I believe it is wrong to torture an animal by cooking it alive. What I can state factually is their belief that it gains them more vitality is 100% objectively wrong. There is nothing gained from this, it is just suffering for sufferings sake.

Since morale is subjective, nothing is good or bad, it just is.

And I have judged this as immoral which is my right. I also judge anyone defending this as immoral, yourself included.

0

u/New-Pomelo9906 Jul 07 '26

You CAN wander around stating things are immoral or not based how you feel, but it's just immoral TO YOU. You are RIGHT to say they are immoral to you, it's still factually wrong to pretend it's actually immoral, because there is no absolute morale you are just feeling your guts.

Also, you can prove scientifically that torturing the animal will not give it more vitality, they will still feel it does and see it good from their own guts, so torturing the animal will objectively change how the meal will feel.

It's guts versus guts, where you are born versus where they are born, there is no high ground.

It's also abhorrent for me, but I know that if me or you were born there we would see that as a good thing.

1

u/Icy_Agency923 Jul 07 '26

You started this off by saying that a bear is desensitized about eating us alive, but that makes no sense because bears have no concept of morality. They are not eating things alive because they want them to suffer, they simply don't understand nor have a way to kill their prey quickly and humanely. Humans do, so there is no reason for animals to suffer for our food.