Question on the Ethics of the Pokemon World

Wow lots of interesting stuff. But from reading the comments it seems most people would say Pokemon are worse off than animals in the real world. In regards to the poor examples for animals being treated poorly, what was wrong with them? Those were all terrible things, I don't know what a less boring argument would be.

One thing id like to add is about Pokemon only fighting if they choose to. A possible explanation to explain this is that the Pokemon have a Stockholm syndrome esque thing going on.
 
Toujours said:
Are there any instances of cows that aren't cow-based Pokemon in the anime? While we have seen fish I can't remember an instance of a cow which means you can't assume they have cows in that world. Not sure why you're pushing that point anyway as you conceded that the overarching point she was making (that Pokemon are eaten in that world) is correct, there's no need to nitpick so closely.

If Pokemon are being eaten, that's an implication that Pokemon die there for reasons other than old age. That's another point you both agree on, you two agree on the two points being made so not sure why you're reducing the argument down to the nitpicky details if you agree with her points.
Click to expand...
Okay, there' the fact there is moomoo milk. Where does moomoo milk come from? Miltanks. Now, if are no cows then why do they call it moomoo milk instead of just milk? If there are no cows then there is no milk if there is no regular milk why not just call moomoo milk, milk. It makes no sense.
Also, Ash once dressed up as a cow.

I only bother with nitpicking it because she's saying a rumor is fact. It's not, it's a rumor. I mean, I think Cubone is a baby Kangaskhan but I don't go around claiming it to be true.
 
curious222 said:
One thing id like to add is about Pokemon only fighting if they choose to. A possible explanation to explain this is that the Pokemon have a Stockholm syndrome esque thing going on.
Click to expand...
That could be possible in a few cases, except mostly, Pokemon can beat up their captives to have them at their mercy. I kind of think Pokemon being captured is almost instinct to them. Odds are the Pokemon would know another one that has been captured or taken away and probably accept the inevitable. They don't have to like it, but it still happens. I suppose they want to make the best out of a situation, so they might as well battle and fight. Of course, some Pokemon don't like taking orders from anybody and rely more on instincts and "experiences" rather than petty commands from humans. That's building trust between Pokemon and trainers, and so on.
 
psyanic said:
That could be possible in a few cases, except mostly, Pokemon can beat up their captives to have them at their mercy. I kind of think Pokemon being captured is almost instinct to them. Odds are the Pokemon would know another one that has been captured or taken away and probably accept the inevitable. They don't have to like it, but it still happens. I suppose they want to make the best out of a situation, so they might as well battle and fight. Of course, some Pokemon don't like taking orders from anybody and rely more on instincts and "experiences" rather than petty commands from humans. That's building trust between Pokemon and trainers, and so on.
Click to expand...


Well, this idea of pokemon is terribly depressing. If part of the nature of pokemon were that they inherently feel inferior to humans and accept their fate. That would be like a slave being born accepting that they are a slave and that is just part of their nature. Pokemon cant be like this inherently or they wouldn't bother trying to resist being captured by pokeballs, or running away before the battle even starts. This seems like the worst possible world for pokemon to live in, being born into accepting their inferiority, even though we all say they are much more powerful than humans.
 
No, they're not born accepting that. As they grow older as more and more humans try to catch them, then they can begin to understand that that's how the world works. Remember, Pokemon are stronger than humans and could kill them if they wanted and the same goes for regular ole' animals, like gorillas and lions. But Pokemon still have that part of animal instinct. They don't form technology and they don't try to organize society. A few species do live in herds, but the structure isn't sophisticated at all. Usually it's an alpha male or a herd leader and they lead them to a water hole or whatever. They don't have money or trade. Yes, some Pokemon are smarter than humans and are way cooler, but you don't see Alakazams building cities or even houses. Pokemon are inferior to humans in that aspect.
 
Wait, what about PMD? They exchanged money and goods.

Or what about that one time where the Pokemon from the anime were at a bar?

And what do you mean they don't use technology? What about Farfetch'd or Marowak or really, any Pokemon since they can all use held items.

And a lot of real world animals build homes for them selves. Sure, they aren't made of concrete or anything but they are still structures (in any case, Pokemon do build houses so I don't really know why I'm debating this).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top