Veganism/vegetarianism and "ethical" lifestyle choices

[One Thousand Words]

I use my logic and common sense to help me see if a action seems moral or not.
and yes, seeing blood, a animal who cry, who strugle, who would do anything in its power to try to survive seems to tell me that I shouldnt kill it.
between this and cutting a plant and often just taking the fruit of a tree seems far less problematic.

Do not Mimosa pudica or touch me not plants pull away then you touch them? If you cut a trees bark it tries to heal itself with a callas. I don't see why picking on the physically and emotionally handicap plant world any less immoral. By your logic it is less evil to kill a small animal than a larger more aggressive animal, simply due to its level of response to your attack

 

[murphythecat]

Yeah but have you ever seen a green cow?



But given the subjective nature of morality, can you really make this statement and have it mean anything? I find it a problem because morals are like opinions. Everyone has different ones.

I can't offer a good reason why I eat plants. Its ultimately that I don't see the harm in it in a broader way.

moral isnt bound to opinion. I just cannot see any situation where I cannot see if the thing is wholesome or unwholesome.
eating a fruit isnt morally problematic at all, you never kill the plants. when you begin to cut plants, now already I could see a problem.
but compared to killing a animal, I can clearly see that its much more unwholesome to kill a pig then take a carrot.

 

[Xorkoth]

Morality is a human concept, and is subjective. Different people do indeed have different morals. I disagree with the morals of a lot of people I meet, but they believe in them. Animals, if they have a moral code at all, have a different moral code than we do. Cat, for example, torture small animals to death over a period of hours. It creeps me out but I don't think my cats are evil. Morality is not universal.

Again, I agree that supporting factory farming and immoral meat practices is immoral. Just not the act of killing an animal to eat it in a respectful way, separated from the corrupted industry we currently have. Ie, not causing it any more pain than is necessary, only doing it minimally, and not wasting anything.

Willow: I only used the "average hunter" thing as a conversation point. I realize very few people actually do this these days, I'm just saying, if someone did, I believe they'd be having a lower impact on the earth than someone who receives their plants via shipping from various places. They'd be fulfilling the same role as a mountain lion or a wolf when they shoot a deer to feed themselves for a while. There are places in the US where the deer have no natural predators left because we killed them all or removed them due to habitat loss or encroachment, and if humans didn't hunt the deer, they'd overpopulate and destabilize the local ecosystem further - we have become the deer's remaining natural predator. Not hunting them to thin them out could be seen as immoral too; we destabilized the ecosystem, so we have to do what we can to keep it in balance, and if we don't, we're causing further harm to a great multitude of creatures (if the ecosystem falls apart).

It's a complex issue and I think we can all agree that factory farming is a horrendous thing that needs to stop. But when you buy meat that isn't factory farmed, or hunt, you're not supporting factory farming. And it's not a black and white issue.

 

[murphythecat]

no, I can see a problem with killing a tree indeed. but taking some of its bark, if you select carefully which to take to not kill the whole tree, I find it morally correct if you take it for the intent to grow spiritually. it seems clear that killing a animal is worse then a plants. I just gave a example when I showed the reaction of a animal being killed. even killing the most calm animal is imo immoral. killing is killing and its wrong. taken a life away from anything is immoral and unwholesome imo.
I do not point fingers at all, I also am to blame as I still buy eggs, milk and tons of vegetables ect.

Do not Mimosa pudica or touch me not plants pull away then you touch them? If you cut a trees bark it tries to heal itself with a callas. I don't see why picking on the physically and emotionally handicap plant world any less immoral. By your logic it is less evil to kill a small animal than a larger more aggressive animal, simply due to its level of response to your attack

 

[One Thousand Words]

What about evil animals? Would you object to killing morally abject creatures for the common good of the planet? Is it better to kill the hitler pig than the Jesus pig?

My home is unique that there are no native mammals other than bats. All mammals which live here are introduced, and as a result have a serious impact on the ecosystem. One of the biggest pests are possums, initially introduced for fur, but now responsible for destroying native fauna and flora at such a rate that even environmental groups support their irradication.

Surely as the apex predator, and moral adjudicator of the land, it is our ethical responsibility to kill these creatures?

 

[murphythecat]

one shouldnt take any action against another being.

this is a very interesting question and we enter a grey zone. ideally, you should, for yourself, only care about your spiritual growth and your purification. if you would do this, you would let nature go its course.


but in this matter, the fact that humans most likely created the problem by killing the balance of the habitats which create imbalance in the ecosystem, then maybe its okay to try to save the ecosystem by eradicating possums.
what do you think?

 

[murphythecat]

very interesting.
but yeah, I think moral is universal. wholesome action can be seen everywhere in all animals just like bad ations in all animals and I think that you can distinguish any action by its intention.
if you kill possums with the intention to save many many other creatures, it seems the intention better then to kill a pig because you like bacons.
I do not believe and it seems illogical to me to think that moral is a human concept only.
its quite clear that its seems to be a universal concept.
but, some action from animal that may seem bad may be misjudged by us. that why ideally, you wouldnt have any judgments in life and just concentrate on your well being.
clearly, a cat who make suffer his prey is very wrong
but a mother cat who kills one of his baby because that baby has deformity and would suffer all his life because of that deformity may very well be morally acceptable.

Morality is a human concept, and is subjective. Different people do indeed have different morals. I disagree with the morals of a lot of people I meet, but they believe in them. Animals, if they have a moral code at all, have a different moral code than we do. Cat, for example, torture small animals to death over a period of hours. It creeps me out but I don't think my cats are evil. Morality is not universal.

Again, I agree that supporting factory farming and immoral meat practices is immoral. Just not the act of killing an animal to eat it in a respectful way, separated from the corrupted industry we currently have. Ie, not causing it any more pain than is necessary, only doing it minimally, and not wasting anything.

Willow: I only used the "average hunter" thing as a conversation point. I realize very few people actually do this these days, I'm just saying, if someone did, I believe they'd be having a lower impact on the earth than someone who receives their plants via shipping from various places. They'd be fulfilling the same role as a mountain lion or a wolf when they shoot a deer to feed themselves for a while. There are places in the US where the deer have no natural predators left because we killed them all or removed them due to habitat loss or encroachment, and if humans didn't hunt the deer, they'd overpopulate and destabilize the local ecosystem further - we have become the deer's remaining natural predator. Not hunting them to thin them out could be seen as immoral too; we destabilized the ecosystem, so we have to do what we can to keep it in balance, and if we don't, we're causing further harm to a great multitude of creatures (if the ecosystem falls apart).

It's a complex issue and I think we can all agree that factory farming is a horrendous thing that needs to stop. But when you buy meat that isn't factory farmed, or hunt, you're not supporting factory farming. And it's not a black and white issue.

 

[treezy z]

one shouldnt take any action against another being.

it's a cold world, kill or be killed.

to make an example of how impossible it is not to take action against other people: every time you buy chinese made goods you're hurting poor americans by driving wages down.

also "one shouldnt take any action against another being." is a statement. you left out the important part, the why.

so tell me, why not?

 

[swilow]

but yeah, I think moral is universal. wholesome action can be seen everywhere in all animals just like bad ations in all animals and I think that you can distinguish any action by its intention.

If morality is universal, then how can we know that our animal brothers understand it in the same that we do? They have no way of telling us and we have no way of hearing them.

 

[murphythecat]

If morality is universal, then how can we know that our animal brothers understand it in the same that we do? They have no way of telling us and we have no way of hearing them.

its all about the intentions behind there action.
some animals have to kill to survive. surely it differs from us. if they wouldnt kill, they would suffer long time before dying in terrible pain, so for them, killing is different.
but us, we could survive in ways much more pure like nuts, fruits, which doest hurts as much nature and others then by killing and eating meat. since we have the choice, the intention behind eating bacon is greed and attachments to the taste of bacon with the knowledge that it has to create suffering in pigs. clearly then, you can see that its more immoral then accepting to limit ones intake of meat because it creates less suffering.
but a animal has no choice, he need to eat and often, they only get as little as they need. we humans buy way to much, eat way to much, ect.. so its really better to not judge others actions. much purer as indeed, it becomes complicated to try to judge the animals actions. but there only three choice: good, neutral or unwholesome actions and intentions.

 

[One Thousand Words]

What about the parasitic worm who requires the pig to be eaten to continue its life cycle? Are we not condemning another organism to death by not eating pork?

 

[murphythecat]

ideally, one should only care about his own actions in his mind in the present moment. we are, in this moment, likely entertaining not only wholesome thoughts and the point is to try to never let a unwholesome thoughts enter one's mind.

judging the life of a worm isnt really beneficial for my spiritual grow and its not like the worm can decide to begcome a vegan, he would die too fast.
but us, we can choose.

What about the parasitic worm who requires the pig to be eaten to continue its life cycle? Are we not condemning another organism to death by not eating pork?

 

[swilow]

Its unfortunate that we have to try and classify lifeforms according to some nebulous scale of 'value' or 'worthiness'. It doesn't really work, so we have to try and make arbitrary classifications and distinctions. Hence the parasitic brain worm is of less importance to me then the integrity (such as it is) of my brain.

 

[swilow]

Morality is a human concept, and is subjective. Different people do indeed have different morals. I disagree with the morals of a lot of people I meet, but they believe in them. Animals, if they have a moral code at all, have a different moral code than we do. Cat, for example, torture small animals to death over a period of hours. It creeps me out but I don't think my cats are evil. Morality is not universal.

Again, I agree that supporting factory farming and immoral meat practices is immoral. Just not the act of killing an animal to eat it in a respectful way, separated from the corrupted industry we currently have. Ie, not causing it any more pain than is necessary, only doing it minimally, and not wasting anything.

Willow: I only used the "average hunter" thing as a conversation point. I realize very few people actually do this these days, I'm just saying, if someone did, I believe they'd be having a lower impact on the earth than someone who receives their plants via shipping from various places. They'd be fulfilling the same role as a mountain lion or a wolf when they shoot a deer to feed themselves for a while. There are places in the US where the deer have no natural predators left because we killed them all or removed them due to habitat loss or encroachment, and if humans didn't hunt the deer, they'd overpopulate and destabilize the local ecosystem further - we have become the deer's remaining natural predator. Not hunting them to thin them out could be seen as immoral too; we destabilized the ecosystem, so we have to do what we can to keep it in balance, and if we don't, we're causing further harm to a great multitude of creatures (if the ecosystem falls apart).

It's a complex issue and I think we can all agree that factory farming is a horrendous thing that needs to stop. But when you buy meat that isn't factory farmed, or hunt, you're not supporting factory farming. And it's not a black and white issue.

As ever, a thought out and deeply compassionate reflection from you Eric

 

[Ninae]

They look like they know what is coming.

 

[treezy z]

ideally, one should only care about his own actions in his mind in the present moment. we are, in this moment, likely entertaining not only wholesome thoughts and the point is to try to never let a unwholesome thoughts enter one's mind.

That sounds like a lot of stress. I'm thinking unwholesome thoughts right now, not too worried about it.

 

[murphythecat]

after some practice, you will be able to maintain mostly positive thoughts. its not very stressful I can say but ideally, its much better to not think and stay mindful only of the body. mindfulness of the thoughts is the beginning and is indeed a bit more stressful then going right to mindfulness of the body. but you have to go from replacing the unwholesome thoughts with wholesome thoughts before having any chance on keeping your mindfulness on the body ime.

so the chain is knowing your thoughts: if its positive go directly to mindfulness of the body as its much calmer.
but if you have unwholesome thoughts, replace with wholesome thoughts and then go back to mindfulness of the body.

there's many different method one can choose to replace a unwholesome thoughts, but its necessary as one realize very fast that any unwholesome thoughts creates suffering in ones mind, thats its not necessary and that one can easily think about something wholesome rather then make one think about unwholesome things

That sounds like a lot of stress. I'm thinking unwholesome thoughts right now, not too worried about it.

 

[Erikmen]

They look like they know what is coming.
Lol..

 

[swilow]

They just look like gentle animals being gentle, to me at least

What about the parasitic worm who requires the pig to be eaten to continue its life cycle? Are we not condemning another organism to death by not eating pork?

I get that people wonder how far down this 'moral stance' goes; does it apply to plants, to insects, to bacteria and so on... But the opposite is not often asked; if it is, in fact, okay to kill and eat animals why is it not okay to kill and eat humans? Because I see a distinction between life-forms (as everyone else does), I think it is 'less' immoral to kill bacteria or plants as opposed to animals. I think that someone who murders a human child has done more wrong then someone who kills an animal. This is an outlook shared almost universally, that there are qualitative differences between the value of lifeforms, and that some must then be somehow less the others... I think its arbitrary, but as the apex predator, my whims are more meaningful then most.

 

[ForEverAfter]

+1

Well said.