Veganism/vegetarianism and "ethical" lifestyle choices

[turkalurk]

Studies on what? How can you study the benefits of non-existence vs existence?

Are you trying to say that meat eating can be done ethically or that veganism/vegetarianism is less ethical then eating meat? Now you've said both. Which is why I guess you are mistakenly seeing condemnation from me towards your choices, of which there has been none. There is a tendency to see behaviours in others we are exhibiting (I guess I could be doing this too )

FWIW, I don't really understand why you keep referring to Kant...

we are arguing ethics, and kant is a known philosopher who formulated ethical principles. it was said that there is no logical defense for eating meat. I was merely presenting an example of a logical argument based on the first ethical principle that came to mind. I could formulate many logical arguments based on different principles of ethics like utilitarianism, consequentialism, egoism, intellectualism, welfarism, etc.

Not everyone shares the same code of ethics, so it is unfair to assume that because someone makes different choices they aren't considering the ethical implications of their actions.

Based on some principles veganism can be considered less ethical, based on other ethical principles it is more ethical. So, it becomes a matter of preference and I prefer meat.

I give up on asking you not to take what I say out of context. you keep trying to debate the ethics of the meat industry when I have made it clear my issues are with those who say eating meat by itself is wrong. In fact, it was said killing any sentient being is wrong. Its like you think I have been talking to you this whole time and have been ignoring the rest of the discussion I have been having with murphy. You want to take my conversation with him, and apply it to your beliefs, but if you don't have a problem with eating meat and are ok with other's decision to eat meat, then my comments have not been directed at you. I think you may be onto something with that projection thing, I am glad you are aware it could be you that is projecting inaccurate implications into my words.

 

[What 23]

No. Violence is just an escalation of natural force.

 

[murphythecat]

No. Violence is just an escalation of natural force.

nothing natural when it comes from human. we have the choice and possibility to eat food that isnt stained with blood.
Violent behavior is a choice in our society, a deliberate choice that can be changed

 

[turkalurk]

I see violence, lack of compassion and suffering when killing a innocent animal.

dont you think violence is wrong?

not always, but it should be a last resort.

 

[murphythecat]

not always, but it should be a last resort.

and we are so far from the last resort that as in now, its totally unacceptable to continue the massacre.

and as soon as someone buy meat, he contribute to the massacre

 

[turkalurk]

it can be said that man is from nature, so his choices are based on his nature.

 

[murphythecat]

hey, why not use that for everything
rape is natural
killing a child is natural
killing millions of animal everyday is natural
destroying nature is natural
everything is acceptable, nothing is wrong, its all natural

it can be said that man is from nature, so all things are natural.

 

[turkalurk]

and we are so far from the last resort that as in now, its totally unacceptable to continue the massacre.

and as soon as someone buy meat, he contribute to the massacre

I see no more reason to carry on this back and forth. I think I have made my point. I don't expect my reasoning to persuade anyone to change their mind and neither should you. Its a matter of perspective and we obviously see things differently. I was only hoping to open your mind to a bigger picture so that you might see the 50 shades of grey that I see, instead of just black or white. Come back to me after you become a Buddhist monk!

 

[What 23]

So natural means good? And unnatural is bad?
Volcanos are natural. They both create and destroy.

And at some point down the evolutionary tree my 'father' raped my 'mom', or the other way around. Somewhere along the line my mom may have been a something kinda like a praying mantis in that she may have consumed my father. Of course, I'm speaking billions of years ago. But was she wrong to do it? My God the violence-- couldn't she have waited? Who the fuck are you to say? I'm glad he raped her. And I'm glad I have a skull and a backbone and a warrior instinct.

 

[turkalurk]

hey, why not use that for everything
rape is natural
killing a child is natural
killing millions of animal everyday is natural
destroying nature is natural
everything is acceptable, nothing is wrong, its all natural

i never said just because something is natural means its always right. That's absurd. I just never liked the word unnatural because it supports the idea that we exist seperately from Nature and not as a part of it. If we destroy the world, then the world destroyed itself. I have faith the world will survive and progress. All this suffering will not be in vain! I see purpose in everything. I am far from a cynical person.

 

[What 23]

Not you sorry. I don't really find myself in much disagreement with you to note so far. Not that I expect you to not disagree with me or that I'm trying to win you to the dark side or something.

 

[murphythecat]

can you control volcanos?

each individual can only control and reflect on their own action they want to make and the impact it has on their feelings and feelings of others.

Ive never talked about praying mantis, and Im not here to judge their way of living. but Im a human, and as a human, its quite evident that theres better way to live, act then others.

So natural means good? And unnatural is bad?
Volcanos are natural. They both create and destroy.

And at some point down the tree my father raped my mom, or the other way around. Somewhere along the line my mom may have been a something kinda like a praying mantis in that she may have consumed my father. Of course, I'm speaking billions of years ago. But was she wrong to do it? Who the fuck are you to say?

so, are you saying now that rape is natural
killing children is natural

and that we shouldnt condemn those who do and try to make them see how bad it is for the well being of the victims?

lets look at the most cruel animal on the planet, compare ourselves to them, and legitimate our bad action saying, well, we are at least not acting like the worst animal on the planet: we are not praying mantis!

 

[What 23]

Well the one time I was in an earthquake (Indiana doesn't get many) I had been playing Quake for the first time in like a decade (7y?) and had just fallen into a pit of magma, so I'll get back to you on that one when I figure out "control".

In the pit was the avatar of a girl who fell in before me, who I had a thought to ask, flirting, if she had red hair, but I didn't say anything. It was the fire... My answer (yea) came to me moments after- her revealing this in a conversation with someone else (the one girl, guys are going to talk to her), before the quake.

I was playing Quake because my Xbox red-ringed. This "Red ring of death" as people came to call it is an indicator that the system needs repaired. I overheated it for about a month by keeping all the heat in to fuse what needed to be (heat sink perhaps, or another connection), but finally it needed repaired to work again.

Wrong thread haha. I mean...

Anyways, "the universe is hostile, so impersonal, devour to survive...".


Have you ever fasted?

 

[What 23]

Praying mantids aren't bad. Yes rape is natural. So is exploiting weakness.

I wouldn't just condemn someone who raped my wife. I'd kill them. Ideally. But watch the liberal parade condemn me for this. Oh the horror. The violence. No... Now this guy is your responsibility. Now he gets to live off of your resources. Because it is right! And moral! And no violence! Yay for society and caring!

 

[RichardMooner]

You guys are arguing senselessly. You're not going to get anywhere trying to justify moral convictions using logic.

 

[ebola?]

...especially when most people aren't explaining the conceptual bases of their ethical reasoning. . .

ebola

 

[swilow]

Praying mantids aren't bad. Yes rape is natural. So is exploiting weakness.

I wouldn't just condemn someone who raped my wife. I'd kill them. Ideally. But watch the liberal parade condemn me for this. Oh the horror. The violence. No... Now this guy is your responsibility. Now he gets to live off of your resources. Because it is right! And moral! And no violence! Yay for society and caring!

I can't even tell who you are arguing with.

 

[turkalurk]

I can't even tell who you are arguing with.

doesn't surprise me! he is talking with your buddy murphy who believes clearing more land for farming is a better alternative than eating meat. If you haven't been following his posts its no wonder you keep confusing the context of my discussion with him.

 

[RichardMooner]

doesn't surprise me! he is talking with your buddy murphy who believes clearing more land for farming is a better alternative than eating meat. If you haven't been following his posts its no wonder you keep confusing the context of my discussion with him.

If people stopped eating meat, we would be overstocked with land because 80% of crops are cultivated to feed livestock. No need to clear anymore.

 

[ebola?]

I can't even tell who you are arguing with.
doesn't surprise me! he is talking with your buddy murphy who believes clearing more land for farming is a better alternative than eating meat.

I hate to do this, but I think that the discussion might benefit if you address the points I posed to you earlier:

Your argument rests on a couple of flawed assumptions. It's problematic that:
1. Farming plants directly tends to be a great deal more calorically efficient than animal husbandry, so rather than our depending on farming meat, its inefficiency tends to exacerbate hunger. Yes, I guess there are pasture lands that could not be effectively used otherwise (and I'm not saying that they should), but these are exceptional.
2. You speak as if we actually interact with ecosystems depending on apex predators; rather, we herd animals under highly controlled conditions, and thus without our upkeep, these populations would not exist. Eg, populations of cows would not swell if we discontinued farming them. Your argument would make more sense if most of us hunted.

Also, it might be useful to explore this:

Okay. So on what grounds do you underpin your ethics?

And I mean in terms of your generalized framework. From this, you should be able to derive your particular case for eating meat (or if you justify your views on human carnivory on more specialized ethical grounds, these warrant explanation and should be squared with your wider ethical framework). I was also relatedly interested in an explanation of how your picture squared with Kantian reasoning (as you claimed earlier).

Generalized discussion note:
I think that people need to be a bit more careful when trying to disprove others' arguments via reductio ad absurdum, as if you're not careful, you can mischaracterize your discussant's views in the course of showing them to lead to undermining consequents. I have seen that in this thread, in a couple cases to the point of the 'rebuttal' hardly making sense.

ebola