|
I think the problem veganism faces is that it is an absolute prohibition stemming from a moral ethical root primarily from the natural thought that it is wrong for animals to suffer because of our choices. That’s fine. But we live in a world that is capitalist and modern. So an impulse like that must justify its absolute claim rationally. It’s going to get critiqued rationally. It does have a strong rational argument for individuals to be vegan that holds up. But when it steps into making a universal argument for its absolute prohibition, that’s when it runs into problems. This is to say when vegans present this is why I am vegan that is coherent. But when they make the jump to all society should be vegan that’s becomes different. Universalizing an absolute moral/ethical prohibition that’s never fully coherent, and that’s not a problem specific to veganism, but a general case when that is done ever. So personally I started eating vegan (but not 100% of the time) because of food allergies and intolerances. It is the only way I can guarantee when I’m eating with my wife that both of us won’t get an ingredient that causes us a problem (unless I have cooked myself from scratch). But I also am strongly moved by the critique of our food systems for meat production (as I have direct knowledge of the scale of commodity grain production for animal feed). I also find animal welfare arguments compelling but in a reformist way not a prohibitive one. So this is to say I am not vegan but about half my and my households food consumption is in line with veganism. I think this is something one will see more of in the future especially if meat prices continue to rise. It’s success for the goals of veganism but not complete success, that is, it is reduction without adoption of the absolute prohibition. It’s probably a good trend. But it’s also probably the sublimation of veganism into capital and modernity.
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 09:06 |
|
|
Cheesus posted:plant based is healthier than meat based diets. A impossible burger with vegan cheese is way way less cholesterol than a cheeseburger even if it has similar sat fats.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2022 22:54
|
|
|
DrBox posted:A vegan promoting reduction through things like "Meatless Mondays" is like a child welfare advocate promoting abuse reduction with "No Touch Tuesdays". Yeah but when you do what you’re doing in this post, you are behaving in a religious way. I don’t think that’s always bad btw. But doing that is a very different argument when ones points it at society. It’s off putting to the people that aren’t inherently inclined. It establishes in groups and out groups and becomes a shibboleth.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2022 22:29
|
|
|
lol you compared eating meat to child molestation and then posted that. Lmao.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2022 22:45
|
|
|
Yeah you’re not going to be particularly effective like that outside of the already vegan. You can be dismissed in the same way a prohibition against eating pork might be might be for folks who aren’t Muslims. Once it’s a moral absolute you’ve got problems unless it’s a moral absolute shared by most of society.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
DrBox posted:not a morally consistent choice or the end goal. Are moral absolutes things that have reality independent of us or are they ideas we construct?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
DrBox posted:I do not believe moral truth a fact of the universe that can be found by looking in a telescope. You have to choose what to value and build out a moral system from there, but an epistemical conversation is pointless when we can simply work within someone's existing moral framework. There’s yer contradiction. When you are an absolutist you are not doing this : “we can simply work within someone's existing moral framework.”
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2022 23:50
|
|
|
DrBox posted:, I was pointing out why an ethical vegan could not advocate for merely reduction. Pointing out harmful choices is not an attack. Nah they don’t have to build the same beliefs you did. Nor arrive at them for the same reasons. They very much could advocate for those things consistently. The internal consistency of their beliefs doesn’t have to be judged by an external consistency with yours.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:Separately from that, I have a question for the thread. Do you consider it ethical to hunt and eat venison, making optimistic assumptions about the hunt? I have in-laws in WI that hunt. For some of them this is a primary protein source for the year. There are programs that let poor folks have more tags too. In some cases venison is a 1:1 substitution for meat that would have to be purchased or that can instead be sold from animals raised or just outright the only source of that protein. What I’ve seen actually fits your assumptions pretty closely.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
DrBox posted:The question of whether or not to save a historic building downtown is not a moral one. It very much is to many people. Buildings, particularly community buildings, can greatly affect how communities meet and organize. What you are doing here is the same thing you are doing in your other arguments. You are presuming that your personal conceptions of morality are universal. The preservation of old buildings is very often considered a moral question especially if they still serve ongoing important functions (both material and symbolic) to a community.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2022 22:57
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:Pretty ridiculous huh Plants definitely do move and react to stimuli. Most just do so very slowly compared to animals. Some aggressively (but slowly!) And some communicate a response that functionally seems similar to pain to other plants. They also have what can be characterized as social struggles. We just don’t notice most of these things. Attenborough did a really excellent series on some of these things decades ago called The Private Life of Plants.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
DrBox posted:Human is a category.  Gotta not be quite so cavalier with categories. I mean we gotta use them, but you’re presenting your points as essentials of the category and you will cause the reactions you are encountering by doing that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2022 18:23
|
|
|
DrBox posted:I'm not sure what you mean by this but I'd appreciate contribution to the discussion rather than just drive by tone policing. I don't need tips on my writing style or tactics, I need arguments for or against cutting a cow's throat for a burger when perfectly good alternatives exist. I’m not tone policing. Basically when one argues in certain ways certain things often happen in the discourse or discussion and some of those are predictable. I’m trying to make you aware of things you doing that make what you are doing harder for you. The framing of how you are approaching this eg. : “I need arguments for or against”. That’s not how all people work. It’s not a fight and making it a fight reduces your ability to morally influence others.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2022 19:57
|
|
|
DrBox posted:I hope I was not giving the impression I'm trying to shut down other topics. My problem is drive-by quips about the delivery rather than the substance. It feels like heckling instead of participating. You are conflating observations about the structure of your assertions with tone or delivery. DrBox posted:Animals are being harmed and exploited and I have not encountered a justification that goes beyond culture, tradition, or personal pleasure. None of these reasons justify harming humans and there is no morally relevant difference to point to that would make it justified for animals. and engage in the conversation taking place. Are you pro-life?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2022 03:30
|
|
|
DrBox posted:I don't like that label and we should destroy it. Who wouldn't be pro living things? I'm pro-sentience and pro-choice, or anti-forced birth and anti-forced use of other people's bodies. So you do make judgments regarding which living animals you think have sentience and can be morally killed. Do you think sentience suddenly happens just at birth? How do you feel about eggs?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
DrBox posted:Sentience does not appear to happen suddenly at birth, but requires certain brain structures to form and "come online" for lack of a better term. If you are making distinctions about when human fetus or even a young child acquires sentience are those distinctions also applicable to animals? If a particular animal other than a human lacks those structures are they not sentient?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2022 04:29
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:He simply saying that shipping fruit across the country is bad for the environment in a way that killing a cow in his backyard is not. He might not be correct. It would depend on how he is feeding the cow if he has adequate pasture or is having to buy grain (which would have been shipped).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 09:06 |
|
|
Lager posted:I don't think there's been any cases of humans contracting CWD though? Has there been updated scientific research on this? It’s basically the same thing as mad cow and that happens. It’s really regionally concentrated, in some places like 1 in 4 deer have it. Other places it’s a absent totally.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2024 21:32
|
|