Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
San Fermín; Fun for the whole family
Topic Started: Jul 6 2015, 01:00 AM (759 Views)
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Made known to Americans by Ernest Hemingway, the annual Fiesta de San Fermín in the city of Pamplona begins today and continues until 14 July. The encierro (running of the bulls from the corral to the plaza de toros takes only about two-and-a-half minutes and is televised live nationally at breakfast time beginning tomorrow morning. It is an centuries-old tradition. The new socialist mayor decided to make a couple of changes this year which includes replacing the opening ceremonial firing of the rocket at noon from the town hall by some local politician with representatives of the Orfeón Pamplonés, a local choir. Wishing to reclaim more participation by families and not only young revelers, the mayor, Joseba Asirón, is encouraging more attractions for children and the official poster depicts a child mocking old Vinegar Face, a character known to children from fiestas. Regardless of politics in this deeply divisive city, everyone looks the same when they wear the red and white outfit of the Peña La Veleta, a Pamplona youth social club.

Posted Image
Edited by Heinrich, Jul 6 2015, 01:01 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Jul 9 2015, 09:57 PM
Gand
Jul 9 2015, 07:17 PM
Gladiatorial combat is actually quite a good analogy, not all the combats were man against man; combats of gladiators against animals were also very popular. The gladiators who took part in such combats were called the “Bestiaries.”

Where have your arguments failed to be logical?
Practically all the evidence you have used to justify bullfighting, the art, the bravery, that there is some glory in it, the courage, the celebration of grace etc, are basically an “appeal to emotion” which is a logical fallacy.

Also your use of Hemingway and the picture of Orson Wells is an “appeal to celebrity” which is also a logical fallacy

You say it isn’t immoral or cruel. Please explain to me how inflicting unnecessary pain on an animal isn’t cruel and what moral code would you use to explain how inflicting that unnecessary pain is moral?




Posted Image
"Nevado" living the bucolic life into old age after being granted an indulto
Good old ''Nevado''

The Spanish are not usually known for '''kindness to animals''
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gand
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Jul 9 2015, 09:57 PM
Gand
Jul 9 2015, 07:17 PM
Gladiatorial combat is actually quite a good analogy, not all the combats were man against man; combats of gladiators against animals were also very popular. The gladiators who took part in such combats were called the “Bestiaries.”

Where have your arguments failed to be logical?
Practically all the evidence you have used to justify bullfighting, the art, the bravery, that there is some glory in it, the courage, the celebration of grace etc, are basically an “appeal to emotion” which is a logical fallacy.

Also your use of Hemingway and the picture of Orson Wells is an “appeal to celebrity” which is also a logical fallacy

You say it isn’t immoral or cruel. Please explain to me how inflicting unnecessary pain on an animal isn’t cruel and what moral code would you use to explain how inflicting that unnecessary pain is moral?
Gladiatorial combat in Roman times was confined to men alone. Bestarii were not gladiators. The eighteenth century refinements introduced in Spain which build upon the highly refined and artistic embellishments of the Moors in Al-Ándaluz since the eighth century and which are the foundation of the modern corrida de toros should not be compared to the brutish, formless spectacle practiced by the ancient Romans or the Visigoths in Iberia.

Logic and emotion are not mutually exclusive. The corrida de toros is essentially emotional and it can be explained logically, as I have done. Emotion is part of the human condition and is in no way inconsistent with logic.

Including Hemingway and Orson Wells who were notable English-speaking afionados who would be familiar to Anglo-Saxons not generally acquainted with the corrida de toros. Indeed, since the opening post is about Pamplona, it would have been an omission not to mention Hemingway. Not many people know that Orson Wells was considered (by himself principally) a friend of Hemingway and a photo of him at Pamplona is both logical and apt.

I already explained to you that no gratuitous pain is inflicted on a toro during a corrida as the bull does all the attacking and could refuse to fight should it so wish. This sometimes happens and then it is led from the arena by some steers. Sometimes a bull is so noble, true, and courageous, that he is granted a reprieve (indulto) which the public will demand.

Posted Image
"Nevado" living the bucolic life into old age after being granted an indulto
Firstly, just to make a point, the Bestarii were gladiators.

http://www.tribunesandtriumphs.org/gladiators/bestiarii.htm

You have not explained any justification for the bullfight logically or morally, you have only appealed to what you perceive as the glory and artistry of the spectacle these are both emotive and subjective concepts. As I pointed out previously “Any perceived artistry of a spectacle doesn’t excuse its cruelty. If it did you could justify any atrocity on the grounds that it has artistic merit,” now that is a logical argument.

A bull like many large herbivores can be naturally aggressive and if I was to go into a field with a bull dressed in an outfit that makes me look a complete pillock and wave a piece of cloth about in front of it, then it would probably attack me, not because it was displaying courage but because I was pissing it off. Your point that “the bull could refuse to fight.” this suggests it is capable of making an informed choice, it isn’t.

Then we have “the bull is so noble, true, and courageous, true, and courageous.” This is more subjective emotive nonsense, these qualities applied to the bull are from a human perspective and are human not bovine, it is giving the animal anthropomorphic virtues it doesn’t possess.

As you are fond of posting pictures, I give you this (sorry Mary I know you find such images distressing.) It is one of very many similar images that may be found on the net. Now anyone who thinks this image doesn’t show an animal suffering in a cruel and unnecessary fashion then I think they need to get their rose coloured spectacles cleaned.

Posted Image

And with that I think I have done, if you want to say anything in conclusion feel free.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Gand
Jul 10 2015, 04:24 PM
Heinrich
Jul 9 2015, 09:57 PM
Gand
Jul 9 2015, 07:17 PM
Gladiatorial combat is actually quite a good analogy, not all the combats were man against man; combats of gladiators against animals were also very popular. The gladiators who took part in such combats were called the “Bestiaries.”

Where have your arguments failed to be logical?
Practically all the evidence you have used to justify bullfighting, the art, the bravery, that there is some glory in it, the courage, the celebration of grace etc, are basically an “appeal to emotion” which is a logical fallacy.

Also your use of Hemingway and the picture of Orson Wells is an “appeal to celebrity” which is also a logical fallacy

You say it isn’t immoral or cruel. Please explain to me how inflicting unnecessary pain on an animal isn’t cruel and what moral code would you use to explain how inflicting that unnecessary pain is moral?
Gladiatorial combat in Roman times was confined to men alone. Bestarii were not gladiators. The eighteenth century refinements introduced in Spain which build upon the highly refined and artistic embellishments of the Moors in Al-Ándaluz since the eighth century and which are the foundation of the modern corrida de toros should not be compared to the brutish, formless spectacle practiced by the ancient Romans or the Visigoths in Iberia.

Logic and emotion are not mutually exclusive. The corrida de toros is essentially emotional and it can be explained logically, as I have done. Emotion is part of the human condition and is in no way inconsistent with logic.

Including Hemingway and Orson Wells who were notable English-speaking afionados who would be familiar to Anglo-Saxons not generally acquainted with the corrida de toros. Indeed, since the opening post is about Pamplona, it would have been an omission not to mention Hemingway. Not many people know that Orson Wells was considered (by himself principally) a friend of Hemingway and a photo of him at Pamplona is both logical and apt.

I already explained to you that no gratuitous pain is inflicted on a toro during a corrida as the bull does all the attacking and could refuse to fight should it so wish. This sometimes happens and then it is led from the arena by some steers. Sometimes a bull is so noble, true, and courageous, that he is granted a reprieve (indulto) which the public will demand.

Posted Image
"Nevado" living the bucolic life into old age after being granted an indulto
Firstly, just to make a point, the Bestarii were gladiators.

http://www.tribunesandtriumphs.org/gladiators/bestiarii.htm

You have not explained any justification for the bullfight logically or morally, you have only appealed to what you perceive as the glory and artistry of the spectacle these are both emotive and subjective concepts. As I pointed out previously “Any perceived artistry of a spectacle doesn’t excuse its cruelty. If it did you could justify any atrocity on the grounds that it has artistic merit,” now that is a logical argument.

A bull like many large herbivores can be naturally aggressive and if I was to go into a field with a bull dressed in an outfit that makes me look a complete pillock and wave a piece of cloth about in front of it, then it would probably attack me, not because it was displaying courage but because I was pissing it off. Your point that “the bull could refuse to fight.” this suggests it is capable of making an informed choice, it isn’t.

Then we have “the bull is so noble, true, and courageous, true, and courageous.” This is more subjective emotive nonsense, these qualities applied to the bull are from a human perspective and are human not bovine, it is giving the animal anthropomorphic virtues it doesn’t possess.

As you are fond of posting pictures, I give you this (sorry Mary I know you find such images distressing.) It is one of very many similar images that may be found on the net. Now anyone who thinks this image doesn’t show an animal suffering in a cruel and unnecessary fashion then I think they need to get their rose coloured spectacles cleaned.

Posted Image

And with that I think I have done, if you want to say anything in conclusion feel free.
Yes it is distressing to me..

But I can't turn my head away and call you a liar...

Because it is true....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Gand
Jul 10 2015, 04:24 PM
Firstly, just to make a point, the Bestarii were gladiators.

http://www.tribunesandtriumphs.org/gladiators/bestiarii.htm

You have not explained any justification for the bullfight logically or morally, you have only appealed to what you perceive as the glory and artistry of the spectacle these are both emotive and subjective concepts. As I pointed out previously “Any perceived artistry of a spectacle doesn’t excuse its cruelty. If it did you could justify any atrocity on the grounds that it has artistic merit,” now that is a logical argument.

A bull like many large herbivores can be naturally aggressive and if I was to go into a field with a bull dressed in an outfit that makes me look a complete pillock and wave a piece of cloth about in front of it, then it would probably attack me, not because it was displaying courage but because I was pissing it off. Your point that “the bull could refuse to fight.” this suggests it is capable of making an informed choice, it isn’t.

Then we have “the bull is so noble, true, and courageous, true, and courageous.” This is more subjective emotive nonsense, these qualities applied to the bull are from a human perspective and are human not bovine, it is giving the animal anthropomorphic virtues it doesn’t possess. ...
Firstly, to correct you, "Among Ancient Romans, bestiarii (singular bestiarius) were those who went into combat with beasts, or were exposed to them. It is conventional to distinguish two categories of bestiarii: the first were those condemned to death via the beasts and the second were those who faced them voluntarily, for pay or glory . The latter are sometimes erroneously called gladiators; to their contemporaries, however, the term gladiator referred specifically to one who fought other men."
For the record

My explanation of la corrida is perfectly logical, without errors of facts and well reasoned. I tried my best to be objective but all I got from you instead of reason was groundless accusations. You are guilty of allowing your prejudiced emotion to prevent you from seeing straight and you have imbued your opinion with haughty moral outrage.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Talking of which it's nice to see the Tories trying to reintroduce full on fox hunting via the back door.


;-)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jul 11 2015, 10:50 AM
Talking of which it's nice to see the Tories trying to reintroduce full on fox hunting via the back door.


;-)
To be honest..I don't think it ever stopped..it just went underground..

''Oh no..my naughty hunting dogs have just ripped a poor fox to pieces...I'll send them to bed with no supper!!''
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gand
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jul 11 2015, 10:50 AM
Talking of which it's nice to see the Tories trying to reintroduce full on fox hunting via the back door.


;-)
Not just fox hunting but I expect they will also try to allow stag hunting and whatever arguments are used to condone the hunting of foxes can’t be applied to hunting stags. If stags need to be culled you can shoot them, they don’t have to be chased to death by a bunch arseholes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Gand
Jul 11 2015, 01:23 PM
Tigger
Jul 11 2015, 10:50 AM
Talking of which it's nice to see the Tories trying to reintroduce full on fox hunting via the back door.


;-)
Not just fox hunting but I expect they will also try to allow stag hunting and whatever arguments are used to condone the hunting of foxes can’t be applied to hunting stags. If stags need to be culled you can shoot them, they don’t have to be chased to death by a bunch arseholes.
Hey..we have a few otters here now...eating all our fish..

And as for wrens..don't get me started..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
This morning, for the first time since the 19th century, a bull, by the name of "Curioso", took one look at the crowd and decided to turn back to the corral, leaving Spanish television commentators unsure about the exact time of the ending of the encierro. The clock disappeared from the screen at 3:33. (One of Curioso's ranch mates gored four revelers, one requiring surgery, including an American aged 20.)

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Jul 11 2015, 03:42 PM
This morning, for the first time since the 19th century, a bull, by the name of "Curioso", took one look at the crowd and decided to turn back to the corral, leaving Spanish television commentators unsure about the exact time of the ending of the encierro. The clock disappeared from the screen at 3:33. (One of Curioso's ranch mates gored four revelers, one requiring surgery, including an American aged 20.)



Ha ha..good move..did he get beaten to death afterwards?..(naughty bull..)

It's a macho thing..men with really small dicks come from every corner of the world..to potentially get gored..

Make bulls suffer..(come on you can't tell me they are happy about it!)

''It’s very hard to claim it’s a Spanish tradition,” Ms Henderson added, referring to the amount of tourists that make up a large part of the visiting audience.

“The only reason it’s still going as an industry is because of tourism. The vast majority of people who attend this event are tourists who do not understand what happens to the bulls at the end.

“You cannot attend this event as a tourist thinking it’s just a bit of fun without lending your support to the way the bulls are violently killed. It’s so unnecessary. It’s archaic.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Only two minor injuries were reported this morning. The bulls of the ganadería of Conde de la Maza (Sevilla) completed the encierro in 2 minutes and 27 seconds despite the overcrowding. The only thing a runner is allowed to carry is a rolled-up newspaper, not that it would do any good against ferocious sharp horns.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
« Previous Topic · Interests · Next Topic »
Add Reply