452
submitted 1 year ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 1 year ago

Farming in the desert is as old as humans writing shit down.

[-] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

That doesn't mean keep doing it.

[-] jaspersgroove@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

Yes but taking so much water from the river that it no longer reaches the fucking ocean is not.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 year ago

You're right about that; that is an industrial era issue.

[-] GONADS125@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

That's an appeal to tradition; a logical fallacy.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

That’s an appeal to tradition; a logical fallacy.

it's just a statement of fact. it made no argument at all, and is not, in itself, fallacious.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club -4 points 1 year ago

It is a statement that growing crops in a desert is something humans have done since humans developed agriculture.

The alternative is removing a ton of food from the market, spiking inflation.

[-] GONADS125@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I'm not invested in this topic argument. I was just interested in highlighting your logical fallacy.

Critical thinking and logic has been on a decline in modern societies, and I believe it's important to point it out so that hopefully people learn to refine their beliefs/illogical thinking tendencies.

I'm sure you can make logical points in an argument advocating for farming in the desert. But that doesn't change the fact that your previous argument explicitly used a logical fallacy and therefore is invalid.

Again, I'm not interested in debating this subject, so you'd be wasting your time trying to convince me of your perspective. I was just trying to help you improve your arguments/promote logical thinking.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 year ago

For those not OP, it is still good to analyze new ideas against standard practice as a way to refine the argument further.

The argument that "people shouldn't live in deserts" may sound good on the surface, people need water and therefore people should live next to a water source. However, this neglects the fact that rivers still flow through deserts and a lot of cradles of civilization came from deserts, in part due to the coordination required to water crops. It also doesn't address that people no longer need to grow crops to make an area economicly productive. Some industries that don't require water can be more water efficient, and therefore settlement may not strain as much of the limited water resources as possible.

A refinement of the argument to "the water resources of a desert shouldn't be stretched to the point where rivers commonly run dry" is a better argument. It gets further to the issue at hand, using a limited resource isn't a problem until you are using so much of the resource that you can't handle shortages.

This isn't an argument to OP, but for others reading.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

So, not that old.

this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
452 points (98.3% liked)

News

23320 readers
3340 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS