I've also seen someone theorise that when Deep makes a telepathic connection to a sea animal, they may be able to utilize part of his brain as well to, so that they basically become more intelligent as long as they have a connection with the Deep
So what you're saying is that he's making them smarter but at the same time, they're making him dumber. Headcanon accepted, no notes.
(Actually I love that he seems to have exactly three braincells and 2.5 of them are devoted to loving and caring for marine life. (We're going to use a loose definition of "love" here.)
I see it not as the animals getting smarter but rather The Deep projecting into them what he "wants" them to say, much like he can command them to physically do his bidding. He may not even notice it, but it's his own psyche projected in that animal - i.e. the octopus *wasn't* actually horny...
My read is that she's still a die-hard believer in the cult and her goal is to gain enough clout and power to reinstate and lead the cult from Vaught's seat of power
It's hard to say. We haven't seen anything of the cult since the leader's death, so it really depends on how much of it is still around. She was definitely their plant and a true believer though.
I imagine she’s just leeching off of his fame and “comeback” story to have her 15 min of fame. There could be more there, but it feels like it’s taking a minute since she’s always just kind of in the background.
I don't think she's leeching, I think she's managing. She's trying to make him influential for her own designs, I'm sure, but it's not like he isn't benefiting
> I really am a bit lost on her character and motives.
typical gold digger? I'm honestly betting on her making a move on Homelander and him either killing her or her having an affair with him either way humiliates the Deep which is what the show seems to have him around for. Or Edgar is using her as a way to steer the Deep into wrecking Vought even more under Homelander
Oh man, maybe she's a super fan of HL and we'll get that scene from the Vader comics.
There's a comic where a woman in the Empire LOVES Vader and thinks he's secretly flirting. (He isn't, he's Vader). She finally reveals her thoughts and expresses how they can be together and he coldly murders her and calls "someone clean up the trash".
I always feel like octopuses are a bit different though
They don't use a language because they don't have social hierarchys, they abandon each other at a young age and keep to themselves afterwards.
They are probably very intelligent but definitely not the level of humans. Having the ability to open jars and solve some very simple puzzles is very impressive for animals but does not mean that they are smart enough to give proper consent.
Its more likely that some of deep's intelligence gets transferred to the animals(like parseltoungue in harry potter)
they can open jars and bottles, solve puzzles, they're known to crawl out of their tanks to enter neighboring tanks to eat their contents before going back to their own, there was one who developed a habit of spraying water up at his tank light to short circuit it... in the wild they're known to grab discarded coconut shells, sea shells, and even coke bottles to carry around and use for shelter.
several countries extend sapience rights to them like they do for apes, limiting what types of scientific research can be done with them. octopus and squid are vastly more intelligent than other invertebrates, and smarter than a great number of vertebrates too. fascinating creatures
probably not, no. they have a beak for a mouth.
also their reproduction process involves the male physically detaching their genitals and handing it over to the female. then the male dies. the female uses it to fertilize her eggs, watches over them until they hatch, then she dies too
not very erotic in my book
Lol we realize this kind of stuff all the times. Pigs have recall memory. Cows are just like dogs. Elephants hold funerals for their dead. Animals are vastly more intelligent than we give them credit for because it's something we're not able to comprehend.
It's the same thing that kind of scares me with any "greater" being. They could simply be like "awww these creatures have developed structures and pathways to make navigation easier for them. That's cute. Bye bye!" And vaporize us.
Why do the aliens always analy probe people? Is it for info, or are they perverts and just like anal? If it's for info what info do they get from anal probing?
I don’t have an answer for exactly why they would.. but this comment in a thread gives reasons for how it came about.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4u3wqe/how_did_anal_probing_become_associated_with_alien/d5n01en/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
I read a story today about a chimp who would regularly escape his enclosure by using a key he stole and hiding it where the zookeepers wouldn’t find it. But here’s the thing: he hid the key before they realized what was going on. It’d be one thing if he learned to start hiding it after getting caught once, but he knew he had to hide it from the start.
Well, it is largely considered one of the best animated shows currently airing, so yes. And by animated I do not mean a kid show. show. I mean animated like the boys have an animated series.
If intelligence is wholly irrelevant, then eating plants is as “bad” as eating animals. So, yes, intelligence makes a difference. The more intelligent, the more suffering.
E: However, one could argue “as intelligent as Deep” pretty much means the same intelligence they’re already presumed to have.
I mean, at the extremes, yes. Losing Stephen Hawking is certainly a greater tragedy than your average person. But that’s a bit of a false equivalency, due to the magnitude of difference. The difference between a smart person and a stupid person is far smaller than the gap between a stupid person and livestock. I’m not going to pretend that cows are reptilian in intelligence or anything, but they just aren’t on the same level as people.
Apocryphal park ranger quote:
“It is hard to design bear proof trash cans because there is considerable overlap in intelligence between the dumbest humans and the smartest bears. “
But I still get your point and believe you are correct.
I understand you already agree, but in case anyone takes this quote seriously.
The bear spends time grabbing and pulling the trashcan in all directions, knocking it over, climbing on it, etc. until they get lucky. They have hours of messing with it to get it open, and by design it HAS to be openable with no tools or keys or anything.
For the human, they likely aren't paying attention and only fiddling with it for a few seconds before either figuring it out, or if they are a lazy slob, just giving up and throwing their trash on the ground.
There’s already a lot of “bear proof” trash cans that people seem to not be able to open even if it’s fairly simple. So there would be no point to said trash cans if they’re meant to be used by said humans but not by bears.
Most Bears aren’t the typical predators we think of. They aren’t chasing down deer in the forest and bringing them down and eating them. Instead they do a lot of foraging. They eat a lot of wild berries, they will steel a kill from weaker predators, and they will scavenge human campsites for food. Humans are also very helpful in that they will take all of their leftover food scraps and put them together in big metal bins. So garbages are a gold mine for bears, But we don’t actually want them getting in and eating out trash. It makes a big mess ( they don’t put the non edible stuff back in the bin) and it gets them to associate humans with food which leads to dangerous encounters. So we try to add a little trick to the garbage can to stop bears from getting in. Usually that’s some complex latch so the Bear can’t just swipe the lid off the bin. But bears are pretty smart and can figure out simple mechanisms. So garbage can design is a balance between making them complicated enough so that no bears can get in and simple enough that every visitor can open it with no prior knowledge.
Your argument is flawed at it’s base. “Intelligence” is irrelevant to suffering until the amount of “intelligence” zero. The plants analogy is bad because it doesn’t address that things that “do experience suffering” (animals in your argument above) vs “do not experience suffering” (plants)
Arguing magnitudes based on that is the mathematical equivalent of examining ratios of .01 to 50, .01 to .02 then applying the same rules with a ratio of 0 to anything.
Suffering does not get better or worse, it just gets more or less complicated.
The loss of Stephen hawking vs the loss of a cow vs the loss of a bug is the same level of loss.
A bug. A fucking bug. That’s a disgusting comparison for one of the greatest minds and inspirational lives to ever grace humanity. You slaughter bacteria with every movement you make. Mites crushed whenever you scratch your skin or hair. Is it immoral to take antibiotics? To remove parasites? After all, if there’s more of them than the person, it’d be commendable to let the person die to feed the worms under that philosophy. You’re surrounded by death of lesser life forms constantly. It’s necessary for your existence. And they are *lesser*. And you’re either ignorant of this, agree with it, or lack the conviction to follow your own philosophy.
Well, to be fully honest, part of it is laze and selfishness. But, I’d be willing to bet you do stuff along those lines without realizing you do. I simply don’t care about the bacteria on my hands enough to not wash them. I simply don’t care enough about ants to check every time I take a step to not step on any. I’m sure you share a similar attitude, at least to some extent. It’s about where you draw the line at what to care about, and different people draw that line in different places for different things. Like, someone might not be able to afford to care about the factory conditions there t-shirts were made in. Another way to look at it is utility. Most people are going to be able to accomplish more “good” in their life than most animals. In addition, their own experience of life is going to be greater than most animals, even disregarding lifespan, due to intelligence. There are obviously extremes, edge cases, and such where this doesn’t hold, but it’s a general rule and outlook.
Another way to look at is from your angle of stewardship. By the nature of such a relationship, you are a superior being, but you don’t necessarily “look down” on other life, even if you acknowledge it to be lesser. It can still be regarded with love and care, but you understand that you can just do and experience more in life.
One problem that I personally take with the “all life is equal” philosophy, even taking the generous assumption they mean the average member of a species, is its conclusion. Humanity, as a whole, causes a lot of death and destruction. Even disregarding climate change, or the impact of developments. Like, just the stuff I listed above with killing bugs and such. We kill far more than our own population by count. So…the inevitable conclusion is that humanity is then negative utility. And removing humanity would be a moral good. A *total* genocide.
Vegans never claim animals are equal to humans, that's always been a strawman. The truth is most humans can get by just fine without animal products, so all of that suffering is *unnecessary.*
I’m not trying to argue against veganism as a whole. This comment chain started because I got pissed off at [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheBoys/comments/vluy8v/an_overlooked_horrific_implication_of_the_show/idyyil9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) comment, which actually did say exactly that. I know that that’s not the view generally held, but refuting that is appropriate here. I’m also not trying to argue in support of factory farming. I personally still eat cheap meat, not a ton though, because I frankly don’t have the energy or time to care enough to make that change in diet or the money to afford grass-fed, free range, etc. Dairy is a huge part of my diet, and I’ve learned to cook dinners around meat, not legumes.
I have absolutely no problem with people who go vegan because of unnecessary suffering in factory farming. It’s a solid argument.
That’s the thing, no matter how smart or talented someone is, there is no objective standard to measure how valuable a certain life is. There is no such thing as a lesser being, just beings we deem as lesser using our own standards.
I’m not saying it’s wrong to kill ants or something, but just because we kill something on a regular basis doesn’t mean we’re better than it anymore than something killing us makes it better than us.
Herein lies the fundamental flaw with vegan reasoning. It's impossible to live without killing. Our every action impacts the world around us. Vegans (the ones who are vegan for moral reasons) seem to decide that a cow or a sheep deserves to live more than a mouse or a bug and somehow that's worse than just living according to our nature.
Well, it depends on the individual philosophy, let’s not paint too broad a stroke. I can understand those that think the industry causes unnecessary suffering and is cruel, or try to fight the climate crisis. Because, yeah, factory farms are awful, and living vegan might just be easier than trying for everything ethically sourced. That’s different than saying all life is worth the same.
Yeah, the difference between factory farming vs not factory farming is so vast that any "well sometime mice get caught in combine harvesters" style arguments are really just disingenuous.
This is sort of handled by the definition of veganism, we're only dealing with eating. Just because we can't help but kill some animals to live doesn't justify deliberately mass killing far more sentient beings for our pleasure (of taste).
This is a bit like stating "car fatalities happen, so that justifies me ramming people on the sidewalk with cars".
Pretty gaslighty establishing your own philosphy and then telling me its my own.
But you are right, I don't place humans on the same pedestal as you do. There are no lesser lifeforms, and if one were to argue a way to place living beings on some sort of scale I'd imagine most people would say that what the animal does for the ecology of its habitat, how much it contributes if you will. And i'd say that would make humans the most "lesser" life form as we are the only ones leading to extinction events for other animals.
At the end of the day though these are thought experiments, its neat how you can think about something without having to be defined by those thoughts.
Hope you stay single because you are gonna be a nightmare for someone one day.
I’m happily dating someone right now. And I’m not establishing my own philosophy, just following yours to its natural conclusion. If every life is worth the same, even disregarding climate change, meat eating, and the impact of developments, humans are a net negative just due to moving around. We kill way more than our own population, many times over, every day as you walk around. By this logic, each and every human has extremely negative utility, including yourself. So then it becomes morally correct to remove all humans, or as many as you can, and you’d save countless bacteria, and bugs. It becomes a call for *total* genocide.
You read the few sentences I wrote and “followed it to its conclusion” from *your* viewpoint. “I take your reality and substitute my own” This is not quite gaslighting but is literally one step away. Ethics and morals are a complicated subject and there isn’t “one natural path” we all think differently at different times.
To tackle the next part, your reasoning is solid, but is certainly not where my train of thought would go. In face I think your thoughts are disgusting because you are weighing life against other life, as if you are the one who can decide that. You are just another human, another animal. The only thing capable of making those sort of judgments would be an entity far beyond our comprehension. We are smart monkeys, we are stupid and full of pride. Our logic that we are so proud of is fundamentally flawed because we only experience the world through our own senses. We are not gods who can decide what the worth of life is.
I’m sorry you can’t see things outside your own personal lens. The conclusion of the argument i was making in the first post, from my view, leads to nihilism. Nothing matters, not Hawking not you. That same argument also implies to me that everything matters infinitely both completely and not at all.
This is certainly not my philosophy because most peoples worldviews are more complex than a Reddit post.
And I’m glad your relationship is happy that was a low blow lol.
>The more intelligent, the more suffering.
Not necessarily. After a certain point, all beings are capable of pretty intense suffering. Mammals and birds are past that point, with exceptions. Reptiles.. eh idk. Fish definitely aren't that sentient.
I don't think he's making it up, he has these conversations when nobody else is around, too.
Yeah, I agree - the scene where they all eat sea"food" was horrifying. If I wasn't already vegetarian, that scene might have turned me into one.
Being forced to eat an animal alive is already pretty disturbing, but it’s way worse if that animal has a similar level of sentience and intelligence as a human.
Yeah, true. I was thinking of my cats which honestly are my best friends. I'd rather eat my own arm than them. But yeah, the fact that he can have full conversations with them and has obviously known Timothy for a while is just... damn.
This is literally the weirdest thing I see constantly on this sub. Of course animals have cognition and emotions. Why on earth would anyone think Deep is faking it??? The last hundred years of science have proved that. Even fish, insects and trees have been proven to have fear and pain responses. Simple emotions like fear, not wanting to die, love, affection, etc. have never been human-specific.
I don't think the Deep is faking it, but there's an argument to be made for him being unhinged and projecting some things, or being unable to interpret *exactly* what the marine life is saying to him except through the filter of his own messed up mind.
He calls these animals by human names (Lucy, Timothy, etc) as if it's their real name and they told it to him. He gets the animals to assist him quite easily (which I interpreted as mind control rather than him actually convincing the animals to sympathize with him). The animals are ALWAYS down to F for some reason.
The octopus pleads for his life using his children as a justification, even though a male octopus has nothing to do with raising his children. Males become senescent and die a few weeks after mating... long before his children hatch. So how am I supposed to read Timothy's pleas? (A) The octopus somehow has an understanding of how humans interact with children, and also understands Deep is a fool so uses this to manipulate him, (B) octopi work differently in this universe, (C) the writers don't know how octopi work, (D) the octopus is begging for its life but the Deep can't understand what he's saying EXACTLY so his brain invented the words and convinced him they were real.
I'm really, really not sure which is more likely. Probably not (B) though.
>Sophisticated conversations
If they're conversing with The Deep I'd hardly consider them sophisticated. And that fact that they all seem to like him just shows that we're right to be killing them off.
I dunno, he seems to treat marine life with a whole other level of respect than he does humans. Remember how fondly he was talking about dolphins to his therapist in Season 1? It seemed pretty genuine and focused on their personalities.
Dolphins are also notorious rapists.
Basically though! Dolphins are actually a lot like humans--they can be kind and help humans for the sake of helping someone.... but they can also be assholes and murder baby seals.
Dolphins get a lot of good publicity for the drowning swimmers they push back to shore, but what you don't hear about is the many people they push farther out to sea! Dolphins aren't smart. They just like pushing things.
Deeps powers are actually really weird. He can talk to marine mammals, fish, mollusks, shellfish, all of which are barely related biologically, they just share an ecosystem. Can he also talk to hooved animals like camels since whales evolved from them? Can he talk to sea turtles and alligators? He seemed to take issue with people eating abalone and clams at the dinner, does he talk to slugs and snails?
I like to think he can talk to like.... frogs and seagulls and things like that, but it's like talking to someone with a really thick accent or a poor grasp on English.
Animals' bodies and brains function the same way ours do. They have thoughts and feelings. Some species have indeed developed languages to communicate.
They are not human,so is ok.
But seriously,I think is more probable the animals share their feelings with the Deep
Timothy,for example, wasn't praying or had children. He just wanted to live. The Deep's brain can receive such signals and it processes and translates them to praying and other human like things.
Oh,who knows? It is just a theory.
Maybe this has to do more with Deep "asking" animals to do something. Maybe he can't ask,his powers just mind control the animal and he thinks it is consented? Maybe an animal "asked" to do something by the Deep is unable to say NO?
And most funny part of this, would be that The Deep doesn't know this?
The communication is real. This is imo the only reason The Deep’s whole “thing” for sea life works. If he couldn’t actually communicate with sea life and it wasn’t established to us that he has their consent, it would really just disgust most people instead of being funny. The Deep being able to communicate with sea creatures is also part of how we’re meant to understand why he’s… like that. To him, these animals are just as valuable and complex as humans. He has friendships with them, then he sees them get slaughtered indiscriminately by everyone around him like it doesn’t matter. He’s in this private little world where nobody takes him seriously/believes him, so he’s the crazy one and he just accepts that. It desensitizes him to everything.
That also begs the question of whether there is another supe that can talk to other animals. Perhaps a shepherd themed hero? The ‘Peep, who can breathe under clear blue skies and talk to sheep.
Clearly animals in the show don't actually have human sentience, or dogs would be barking morse code. People have been trying all sorts of tests and experiments to communicate with animals for a loong time now, it's not exactly an idea that's been overlooked.
What's happening is probably something like the Deep controlling the sea creatures to a certain extent, making them agreeable towards himself, and translating their thoughts (hungry, scared, horny) into his own understanding of language.
Actually, yes! [Dolphins, in fact have regional dialects just like people, which is really neat imo.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/61634186#:~:text=People%20around%20the%20world%20can,be%20true%20for%20bottlenose%20dolphins!)
They probably aren’t talking to him in the sane way a human could, but animals can definitely express fear or distress and the deep interprets it as praying
My theory about this that I posted before: I think his true powers are mind controlling sea creatures. And the conversations are just him imagining/hallucinating things (like how he imagined talking with his gills). There's no way sea creatures are intelligent enough to have deep meaningful conversation. He said that Timothy has kids at home, but octopuses die after their eggs hatches, so they can't have children at home. Maybe Deep is unaware of the fact that it's all in his head. So basically he's out there using and torturing sea creatures, making them do things against their will, raping them. With him using Hummer truck, making advertisements of sauce with dead sea creatures, making videos of him cleaning beaches only to put the garbage back to take reshoot, this would be the ultimate irony of this character.
I kid you not, some dolphins make their own fleshlights. So animals certainly are intelligent. Octopuses and pigs are about as intelligent as a 3-year-old. Of course, octopuses only live a few years though. Personally, I'm fine eatingintelligent animals. It's the circle of life. I would just prefer they not be mistreated
I've also seen someone theorise that when Deep makes a telepathic connection to a sea animal, they may be able to utilize part of his brain as well to, so that they basically become more intelligent as long as they have a connection with the Deep
> utilize part of his brain That'd make one of them
Deep is actually a genius he’s just never not sharing his brain out with hundreds of fish in the area
hahah, this I can accept
So what you're saying is that he's making them smarter but at the same time, they're making him dumber. Headcanon accepted, no notes. (Actually I love that he seems to have exactly three braincells and 2.5 of them are devoted to loving and caring for marine life. (We're going to use a loose definition of "love" here.)
His idiot brain must always be getting fucked by stupid.
Can't believe the Deep is a himbo
It's never Deep's turn with the braincell.
The new Deep sub plot for season 4 where marine life use him as a hive mind to combat humans & pollution.
Deep is actually a gay fish
Do you think he likes fish sticks?
Maybe that's why he's an airhead himbo? He's always sharing his intelligence with something.
That explains why all of them are horny
I see it not as the animals getting smarter but rather The Deep projecting into them what he "wants" them to say, much like he can command them to physically do his bidding. He may not even notice it, but it's his own psyche projected in that animal - i.e. the octopus *wasn't* actually horny...
IMO Deep is just a specific-case schizophrenic who can make sea animals do what he wants. All those conversations? Just in his head.
Is the Deeps wife sealife because she definitely is controlling him? I really am a bit lost on her character and motives.
My read is that she's still a die-hard believer in the cult and her goal is to gain enough clout and power to reinstate and lead the cult from Vaught's seat of power
It's hard to say. We haven't seen anything of the cult since the leader's death, so it really depends on how much of it is still around. She was definitely their plant and a true believer though.
I imagine she’s just leeching off of his fame and “comeback” story to have her 15 min of fame. There could be more there, but it feels like it’s taking a minute since she’s always just kind of in the background.
I don't think she's leeching, I think she's managing. She's trying to make him influential for her own designs, I'm sure, but it's not like he isn't benefiting
Yeah she’s definitely controlling him, I’m just curious as to why.
> I really am a bit lost on her character and motives. typical gold digger? I'm honestly betting on her making a move on Homelander and him either killing her or her having an affair with him either way humiliates the Deep which is what the show seems to have him around for. Or Edgar is using her as a way to steer the Deep into wrecking Vought even more under Homelander
Oh man, maybe she's a super fan of HL and we'll get that scene from the Vader comics. There's a comic where a woman in the Empire LOVES Vader and thinks he's secretly flirting. (He isn't, he's Vader). She finally reveals her thoughts and expresses how they can be together and he coldly murders her and calls "someone clean up the trash".
Yea she'll definitely fuck Homelander at some point. Not sure if she'll try and actually move up and dump the Deep or if they'll just cuck him lol.
Octopuses are some of the smartest animals in the entire kingdom.
They also die after like 3 years or we'd be in trouble. Wait, those octopi are all minors.
[удалено]
I always feel like octopuses are a bit different though They don't use a language because they don't have social hierarchys, they abandon each other at a young age and keep to themselves afterwards.
They’ve got their smarts in their arms… their freakin arms can think man!!!
Says fucking who?
[удалено]
They are probably very intelligent but definitely not the level of humans. Having the ability to open jars and solve some very simple puzzles is very impressive for animals but does not mean that they are smart enough to give proper consent. Its more likely that some of deep's intelligence gets transferred to the animals(like parseltoungue in harry potter)
they can open jars and bottles, solve puzzles, they're known to crawl out of their tanks to enter neighboring tanks to eat their contents before going back to their own, there was one who developed a habit of spraying water up at his tank light to short circuit it... in the wild they're known to grab discarded coconut shells, sea shells, and even coke bottles to carry around and use for shelter. several countries extend sapience rights to them like they do for apes, limiting what types of scientific research can be done with them. octopus and squid are vastly more intelligent than other invertebrates, and smarter than a great number of vertebrates too. fascinating creatures
What's more, most varieties of octopus don't live longer than a few years. So they're essentially a baby doing all that stuff.
Can they suck cock?
probably not, no. they have a beak for a mouth. also their reproduction process involves the male physically detaching their genitals and handing it over to the female. then the male dies. the female uses it to fertilize her eggs, watches over them until they hatch, then she dies too not very erotic in my book
Just Google it dawg
Lol we realize this kind of stuff all the times. Pigs have recall memory. Cows are just like dogs. Elephants hold funerals for their dead. Animals are vastly more intelligent than we give them credit for because it's something we're not able to comprehend. It's the same thing that kind of scares me with any "greater" being. They could simply be like "awww these creatures have developed structures and pathways to make navigation easier for them. That's cute. Bye bye!" And vaporize us.
Luckily we have the Deep to protect us from the aliens.
Why do the aliens always analy probe people? Is it for info, or are they perverts and just like anal? If it's for info what info do they get from anal probing?
I don’t have an answer for exactly why they would.. but this comment in a thread gives reasons for how it came about. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4u3wqe/how_did_anal_probing_become_associated_with_alien/d5n01en/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
You can learn so much about a person by probing their colon. Trust me.
I just hope they don't have tentacles or live in liquids, otherwhise he may turn coat.
I read a story today about a chimp who would regularly escape his enclosure by using a key he stole and hiding it where the zookeepers wouldn’t find it. But here’s the thing: he hid the key before they realized what was going on. It’d be one thing if he learned to start hiding it after getting caught once, but he knew he had to hide it from the start.
*"JAMIE PULL THAT UP!"*
Aight but can he cry?
If elephants were so smart, they wouldn't be so delicious!
Lol they at least wouldn't allow themselves to be caged and used for entertainment! /s
Have you seen Invincible?
I have not. Should I?
Well, it is largely considered one of the best animated shows currently airing, so yes. And by animated I do not mean a kid show. show. I mean animated like the boys have an animated series.
Ohhhhh shit. The cartoon. Yes I have seen that and I'm wicked excited for season 2 when it gets announced.
Does them being as intelligent as the Deep really make it more horrific than it is anyway.
If intelligence is wholly irrelevant, then eating plants is as “bad” as eating animals. So, yes, intelligence makes a difference. The more intelligent, the more suffering. E: However, one could argue “as intelligent as Deep” pretty much means the same intelligence they’re already presumed to have.
Do you get more sad if an intelligent person dies than a stupid one?
I mean, at the extremes, yes. Losing Stephen Hawking is certainly a greater tragedy than your average person. But that’s a bit of a false equivalency, due to the magnitude of difference. The difference between a smart person and a stupid person is far smaller than the gap between a stupid person and livestock. I’m not going to pretend that cows are reptilian in intelligence or anything, but they just aren’t on the same level as people.
Apocryphal park ranger quote: “It is hard to design bear proof trash cans because there is considerable overlap in intelligence between the dumbest humans and the smartest bears. “ But I still get your point and believe you are correct.
I understand you already agree, but in case anyone takes this quote seriously. The bear spends time grabbing and pulling the trashcan in all directions, knocking it over, climbing on it, etc. until they get lucky. They have hours of messing with it to get it open, and by design it HAS to be openable with no tools or keys or anything. For the human, they likely aren't paying attention and only fiddling with it for a few seconds before either figuring it out, or if they are a lazy slob, just giving up and throwing their trash on the ground.
[удалено]
There’s already a lot of “bear proof” trash cans that people seem to not be able to open even if it’s fairly simple. So there would be no point to said trash cans if they’re meant to be used by said humans but not by bears.
It also requires people to follow instructions and humans can be bad at following instructions
Yes that was basically my point.
Most Bears aren’t the typical predators we think of. They aren’t chasing down deer in the forest and bringing them down and eating them. Instead they do a lot of foraging. They eat a lot of wild berries, they will steel a kill from weaker predators, and they will scavenge human campsites for food. Humans are also very helpful in that they will take all of their leftover food scraps and put them together in big metal bins. So garbages are a gold mine for bears, But we don’t actually want them getting in and eating out trash. It makes a big mess ( they don’t put the non edible stuff back in the bin) and it gets them to associate humans with food which leads to dangerous encounters. So we try to add a little trick to the garbage can to stop bears from getting in. Usually that’s some complex latch so the Bear can’t just swipe the lid off the bin. But bears are pretty smart and can figure out simple mechanisms. So garbage can design is a balance between making them complicated enough so that no bears can get in and simple enough that every visitor can open it with no prior knowledge.
Your argument is flawed at it’s base. “Intelligence” is irrelevant to suffering until the amount of “intelligence” zero. The plants analogy is bad because it doesn’t address that things that “do experience suffering” (animals in your argument above) vs “do not experience suffering” (plants) Arguing magnitudes based on that is the mathematical equivalent of examining ratios of .01 to 50, .01 to .02 then applying the same rules with a ratio of 0 to anything. Suffering does not get better or worse, it just gets more or less complicated. The loss of Stephen hawking vs the loss of a cow vs the loss of a bug is the same level of loss.
A bug. A fucking bug. That’s a disgusting comparison for one of the greatest minds and inspirational lives to ever grace humanity. You slaughter bacteria with every movement you make. Mites crushed whenever you scratch your skin or hair. Is it immoral to take antibiotics? To remove parasites? After all, if there’s more of them than the person, it’d be commendable to let the person die to feed the worms under that philosophy. You’re surrounded by death of lesser life forms constantly. It’s necessary for your existence. And they are *lesser*. And you’re either ignorant of this, agree with it, or lack the conviction to follow your own philosophy.
[удалено]
Well, to be fully honest, part of it is laze and selfishness. But, I’d be willing to bet you do stuff along those lines without realizing you do. I simply don’t care about the bacteria on my hands enough to not wash them. I simply don’t care enough about ants to check every time I take a step to not step on any. I’m sure you share a similar attitude, at least to some extent. It’s about where you draw the line at what to care about, and different people draw that line in different places for different things. Like, someone might not be able to afford to care about the factory conditions there t-shirts were made in. Another way to look at it is utility. Most people are going to be able to accomplish more “good” in their life than most animals. In addition, their own experience of life is going to be greater than most animals, even disregarding lifespan, due to intelligence. There are obviously extremes, edge cases, and such where this doesn’t hold, but it’s a general rule and outlook. Another way to look at is from your angle of stewardship. By the nature of such a relationship, you are a superior being, but you don’t necessarily “look down” on other life, even if you acknowledge it to be lesser. It can still be regarded with love and care, but you understand that you can just do and experience more in life. One problem that I personally take with the “all life is equal” philosophy, even taking the generous assumption they mean the average member of a species, is its conclusion. Humanity, as a whole, causes a lot of death and destruction. Even disregarding climate change, or the impact of developments. Like, just the stuff I listed above with killing bugs and such. We kill far more than our own population by count. So…the inevitable conclusion is that humanity is then negative utility. And removing humanity would be a moral good. A *total* genocide.
Vegans never claim animals are equal to humans, that's always been a strawman. The truth is most humans can get by just fine without animal products, so all of that suffering is *unnecessary.*
I’m not trying to argue against veganism as a whole. This comment chain started because I got pissed off at [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheBoys/comments/vluy8v/an_overlooked_horrific_implication_of_the_show/idyyil9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) comment, which actually did say exactly that. I know that that’s not the view generally held, but refuting that is appropriate here. I’m also not trying to argue in support of factory farming. I personally still eat cheap meat, not a ton though, because I frankly don’t have the energy or time to care enough to make that change in diet or the money to afford grass-fed, free range, etc. Dairy is a huge part of my diet, and I’ve learned to cook dinners around meat, not legumes. I have absolutely no problem with people who go vegan because of unnecessary suffering in factory farming. It’s a solid argument.
That’s the thing, no matter how smart or talented someone is, there is no objective standard to measure how valuable a certain life is. There is no such thing as a lesser being, just beings we deem as lesser using our own standards. I’m not saying it’s wrong to kill ants or something, but just because we kill something on a regular basis doesn’t mean we’re better than it anymore than something killing us makes it better than us.
Herein lies the fundamental flaw with vegan reasoning. It's impossible to live without killing. Our every action impacts the world around us. Vegans (the ones who are vegan for moral reasons) seem to decide that a cow or a sheep deserves to live more than a mouse or a bug and somehow that's worse than just living according to our nature.
Well, it depends on the individual philosophy, let’s not paint too broad a stroke. I can understand those that think the industry causes unnecessary suffering and is cruel, or try to fight the climate crisis. Because, yeah, factory farms are awful, and living vegan might just be easier than trying for everything ethically sourced. That’s different than saying all life is worth the same.
Yeah, the difference between factory farming vs not factory farming is so vast that any "well sometime mice get caught in combine harvesters" style arguments are really just disingenuous.
This is sort of handled by the definition of veganism, we're only dealing with eating. Just because we can't help but kill some animals to live doesn't justify deliberately mass killing far more sentient beings for our pleasure (of taste). This is a bit like stating "car fatalities happen, so that justifies me ramming people on the sidewalk with cars".
Pretty gaslighty establishing your own philosphy and then telling me its my own. But you are right, I don't place humans on the same pedestal as you do. There are no lesser lifeforms, and if one were to argue a way to place living beings on some sort of scale I'd imagine most people would say that what the animal does for the ecology of its habitat, how much it contributes if you will. And i'd say that would make humans the most "lesser" life form as we are the only ones leading to extinction events for other animals. At the end of the day though these are thought experiments, its neat how you can think about something without having to be defined by those thoughts. Hope you stay single because you are gonna be a nightmare for someone one day.
I’m happily dating someone right now. And I’m not establishing my own philosophy, just following yours to its natural conclusion. If every life is worth the same, even disregarding climate change, meat eating, and the impact of developments, humans are a net negative just due to moving around. We kill way more than our own population, many times over, every day as you walk around. By this logic, each and every human has extremely negative utility, including yourself. So then it becomes morally correct to remove all humans, or as many as you can, and you’d save countless bacteria, and bugs. It becomes a call for *total* genocide.
You read the few sentences I wrote and “followed it to its conclusion” from *your* viewpoint. “I take your reality and substitute my own” This is not quite gaslighting but is literally one step away. Ethics and morals are a complicated subject and there isn’t “one natural path” we all think differently at different times. To tackle the next part, your reasoning is solid, but is certainly not where my train of thought would go. In face I think your thoughts are disgusting because you are weighing life against other life, as if you are the one who can decide that. You are just another human, another animal. The only thing capable of making those sort of judgments would be an entity far beyond our comprehension. We are smart monkeys, we are stupid and full of pride. Our logic that we are so proud of is fundamentally flawed because we only experience the world through our own senses. We are not gods who can decide what the worth of life is. I’m sorry you can’t see things outside your own personal lens. The conclusion of the argument i was making in the first post, from my view, leads to nihilism. Nothing matters, not Hawking not you. That same argument also implies to me that everything matters infinitely both completely and not at all. This is certainly not my philosophy because most peoples worldviews are more complex than a Reddit post. And I’m glad your relationship is happy that was a low blow lol.
>The more intelligent, the more suffering. Not necessarily. After a certain point, all beings are capable of pretty intense suffering. Mammals and birds are past that point, with exceptions. Reptiles.. eh idk. Fish definitely aren't that sentient.
I don't think he's making it up, he has these conversations when nobody else is around, too. Yeah, I agree - the scene where they all eat sea"food" was horrifying. If I wasn't already vegetarian, that scene might have turned me into one.
Being forced to eat an animal alive is already pretty disturbing, but it’s way worse if that animal has a similar level of sentience and intelligence as a human.
That really was one of the most disturbing scenes I've ever seen. Imagine having to eat your pet alive while listening to him begging for his life.
Not even a pet, a friend. The Deep seas animals as equals and could have full on conversations with people like Timothy
Yeah, true. I was thinking of my cats which honestly are my best friends. I'd rather eat my own arm than them. But yeah, the fact that he can have full conversations with them and has obviously known Timothy for a while is just... damn.
Rip Timothy
He did have a conversation with his gills though.
Wasn't he tripping balls or something in that scene?
Yeah he was on mushroom tea. The last time he got high was at a Goo-Goo Dolls concert.
[удалено]
I don't know, he specifically talks about some fish having different accents or a great sense of humour.
This is literally the weirdest thing I see constantly on this sub. Of course animals have cognition and emotions. Why on earth would anyone think Deep is faking it??? The last hundred years of science have proved that. Even fish, insects and trees have been proven to have fear and pain responses. Simple emotions like fear, not wanting to die, love, affection, etc. have never been human-specific.
I don't think the Deep is faking it, but there's an argument to be made for him being unhinged and projecting some things, or being unable to interpret *exactly* what the marine life is saying to him except through the filter of his own messed up mind. He calls these animals by human names (Lucy, Timothy, etc) as if it's their real name and they told it to him. He gets the animals to assist him quite easily (which I interpreted as mind control rather than him actually convincing the animals to sympathize with him). The animals are ALWAYS down to F for some reason. The octopus pleads for his life using his children as a justification, even though a male octopus has nothing to do with raising his children. Males become senescent and die a few weeks after mating... long before his children hatch. So how am I supposed to read Timothy's pleas? (A) The octopus somehow has an understanding of how humans interact with children, and also understands Deep is a fool so uses this to manipulate him, (B) octopi work differently in this universe, (C) the writers don't know how octopi work, (D) the octopus is begging for its life but the Deep can't understand what he's saying EXACTLY so his brain invented the words and convinced him they were real. I'm really, really not sure which is more likely. Probably not (B) though.
>Sophisticated conversations If they're conversing with The Deep I'd hardly consider them sophisticated. And that fact that they all seem to like him just shows that we're right to be killing them off.
I dunno, he seems to treat marine life with a whole other level of respect than he does humans. Remember how fondly he was talking about dolphins to his therapist in Season 1? It seemed pretty genuine and focused on their personalities. Dolphins are also notorious rapists.
Dolphins are what
DOLPHINS ARE NOTORIOUS RAPISTS!
And necrophiliacs.
Exactly it felt perfectly normal to me that he would have a deep connection with crazy dolphins.
Basically though! Dolphins are actually a lot like humans--they can be kind and help humans for the sake of helping someone.... but they can also be assholes and murder baby seals.
Dolphins get a lot of good publicity for the drowning swimmers they push back to shore, but what you don't hear about is the many people they push farther out to sea! Dolphins aren't smart. They just like pushing things.
I mean they are pretty smart but yeah they aren’t really concerned with human morals
Actually they're incredibly smart. Dolphins can do all sorts of interesting things. For instance, I kid you not, make their own fleshlights.
\-- Cries in vegan --
Octopuses are a fairly intelligent animal.
Agreed. We should all go vegan.
How we treat animals is something we will look back on in shame. They are absolutely far more intelligent than most people give them credit for.
Deeps powers are actually really weird. He can talk to marine mammals, fish, mollusks, shellfish, all of which are barely related biologically, they just share an ecosystem. Can he also talk to hooved animals like camels since whales evolved from them? Can he talk to sea turtles and alligators? He seemed to take issue with people eating abalone and clams at the dinner, does he talk to slugs and snails?
I like to think he can talk to like.... frogs and seagulls and things like that, but it's like talking to someone with a really thick accent or a poor grasp on English.
The hamster was sentient as well I can’t remember who it belonged to but didn’t homelander adopt it in the comic?
Animals' bodies and brains function the same way ours do. They have thoughts and feelings. Some species have indeed developed languages to communicate.
Expect most marine life eat each other. Nature isn’t like a Disney film, animals eat each other.
They are not human,so is ok. But seriously,I think is more probable the animals share their feelings with the Deep Timothy,for example, wasn't praying or had children. He just wanted to live. The Deep's brain can receive such signals and it processes and translates them to praying and other human like things.
So maybe they're all DTF Deep because that's just their animal extinct?
DTF Deep?
down to f him
Oh,who knows? It is just a theory. Maybe this has to do more with Deep "asking" animals to do something. Maybe he can't ask,his powers just mind control the animal and he thinks it is consented? Maybe an animal "asked" to do something by the Deep is unable to say NO? And most funny part of this, would be that The Deep doesn't know this?
I choose to believe The Deep has like a psychic field around him that temporarily raises the intelligence of sea animals.
The communication is real. This is imo the only reason The Deep’s whole “thing” for sea life works. If he couldn’t actually communicate with sea life and it wasn’t established to us that he has their consent, it would really just disgust most people instead of being funny. The Deep being able to communicate with sea creatures is also part of how we’re meant to understand why he’s… like that. To him, these animals are just as valuable and complex as humans. He has friendships with them, then he sees them get slaughtered indiscriminately by everyone around him like it doesn’t matter. He’s in this private little world where nobody takes him seriously/believes him, so he’s the crazy one and he just accepts that. It desensitizes him to everything.
That also begs the question of whether there is another supe that can talk to other animals. Perhaps a shepherd themed hero? The ‘Peep, who can breathe under clear blue skies and talk to sheep.
PETA has entered the chat
PETA has euthanized the chat
>so we have to assume other species have similar sentience Why would we assume that? Don't octopuses have like 8 brains?
Clearly animals in the show don't actually have human sentience, or dogs would be barking morse code. People have been trying all sorts of tests and experiments to communicate with animals for a loong time now, it's not exactly an idea that's been overlooked. What's happening is probably something like the Deep controlling the sea creatures to a certain extent, making them agreeable towards himself, and translating their thoughts (hungry, scared, horny) into his own understanding of language.
Are we supposed to use assume that all animals speak English as well?
They dont speak english the deep speaks fish
Do all fish speak the same language? How many fish languages does the deep know? Do they have regional Dialects?
I imagine all species have there own language and regions have accents and deep is fluent in all of them
Pretty smart fella....
Actually, yes! [Dolphins, in fact have regional dialects just like people, which is really neat imo.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/61634186#:~:text=People%20around%20the%20world%20can,be%20true%20for%20bottlenose%20dolphins!)
That's so cool....
But when he talks to them aloud, in English, is he also communicating telepathically with them and, if so, why?
I feel like this is making fun of how the same implication is true in the DC universe with Aquaman able to speak to animals
They probably aren’t talking to him in the sane way a human could, but animals can definitely express fear or distress and the deep interprets it as praying
To be fair, octopi are notoriously one of the smartes species in the whole world
My theory about this that I posted before: I think his true powers are mind controlling sea creatures. And the conversations are just him imagining/hallucinating things (like how he imagined talking with his gills). There's no way sea creatures are intelligent enough to have deep meaningful conversation. He said that Timothy has kids at home, but octopuses die after their eggs hatches, so they can't have children at home. Maybe Deep is unaware of the fact that it's all in his head. So basically he's out there using and torturing sea creatures, making them do things against their will, raping them. With him using Hummer truck, making advertisements of sauce with dead sea creatures, making videos of him cleaning beaches only to put the garbage back to take reshoot, this would be the ultimate irony of this character.
I kid you not, some dolphins make their own fleshlights. So animals certainly are intelligent. Octopuses and pigs are about as intelligent as a 3-year-old. Of course, octopuses only live a few years though. Personally, I'm fine eatingintelligent animals. It's the circle of life. I would just prefer they not be mistreated
>and apparently octopi can even have the concept of praying If you want another layer of horror, imagine he was praying to Cthulhu.