So it ' s not that it ' s deserved just that he can be a sore winner ? <| sep |> I was mostly quibbling about that you interpret the authors one justification to say that there cannot be many parts of that justification . In any case , you could don ' t need to go to Schrdinger to get a scenario where there would be no true or false answer to the question Is it ever permissible to eat animals ? . It could be that moral vocabulary is just blunt expression of emotion , like buuuh ! or hurray ! . So a sentence like it is permissable to kill animals would be Hurray for killing animals ! which is neither true or false . <| sep |> Perhaps elaborating a bit more on the totem masters ? But other than that , I think it ' s pretty perfect . Really well done . Descriptive . Vivid . Keep doing what you ' re doing