If you live in an apartment, just don’t get one

Reasoning edit: pets, especially cats, will leave a smell all over furniture. Cleaning becomes an even worse chore due to the fur. They also require “house training” in order to not chew/claw/destroy most stuff that’s lying around the house.

  • CompactFlax
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Upvoted, because you’re totally incorrect.

    Are you advocating for the somewhat extreme position that pets shouldn’t exist?

    Your reasoning suggests that basic duties of pet ownership such as basic training and grooming are too onerous. Canids do not soil their den in the wild and so easily are trained not to soil indoors, and cats don’t need training to use a litter box.

    • I Cast Fist@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      4 days ago

      Are you advocating for the somewhat extreme position that pets shouldn’t exist?

      Reductio ad absurdum is the technique of reducing an argument or hypothesis to absurdity, by pushing the argument’s premises or conclusions to their logical limits and showing how ridiculous the consequences would be, thus disproving or discrediting the argument.

      • Glytch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        3 days ago

        If we don’t keep pets in the house where do we keep them? Constantly outside? Do we build a separate shed for them? What about fish? Can people keep fish inside? Or lizards? Or Guinea pigs? Or Hamsters? Or gerbils? Or any of the myriad of other small animals that people keep in terrariums/aquariums and can’t be kept outside?

        The problem with citing that fallacy is that your position is already absurd without reduction.