Empathy refers more generally to our ability to take the perspective of and feel the emotions of another living being. Compassion is when those feelings and thoughts include the desire to help. (Can be substituted for Altruism). Ethical Consistency is being logically consistent within a belief. Primarily regarding the consistency of the justification being used. — chatterbears
I never condone or support the exploitation of animals. Therefore I am not a speciesist. But if you want to redefine the term 'speciesism' to mean that anyone who holds the position that humans are of higher value than animals, this is not the same term. But as I stated before, even though I do think Humans are more valuable, I do not think they should exploit animals and/or cause needless suffering. — chatterbears
I do not assign higher value to humans solely on the basis of being a different species. — chatterbears
Flawed moral argumentation. — chatterbears
Free-range, organic, grass-fed, cage-free, are all irrelevant to the treatment of the animals. — chatterbears
Well, you would either need to attempt to show why this (not difficult) or any other premise is wrong. — jastopher
You are causing environmental damage (to the earth), health damage (to yourself) and physical pain (to the animals), when you decide to eat meat — chatterbears
This was supposed to be an example of the basic premises you mention. Basic premises are presumably ones that aren't supported; just accepted or not. Or did you mean something else? — Michael
But if cows could be raised humanely and killed without pain? I don't have a problem with that. Though I don't know if I hold to your moral trifecta, either. — Moliere
so you are speciesist — jastopher
No, because an animal would still be getting killed, which doesn't allow the animal to live its natural life. That is the same as me asking you, "If we could raise humans humanely, but kill them without pain when they turn 20 years old, would you then condone that treatment?" - No. If you wouldn't be OK with that treatment for yourself or your own species, why would it be OK for you to treat another species in the same way?If it were possible to eliminate all suffering from the supply chain, would you then condone meat eating? — jastopher
If lab meat involves no pain or suffering, I have no issue with it. Eating insects is similar to eating animals. Why do it when it is not needed or necessary? Unless your survival rests on the diet of insects (or meat), there's no reason to do so.Where do you stand on laboratory grown meat? What about eating insects? — jastopher
Buying meat from a supermarket doesn't cause environmental damage to the environment, and nor does it cause physical pain to animals. The fact that the money I spend eventually finds its away back to the farmers doesn't pass any responsibility that they have for their actions on to me. — Michael
"If I raised a cow humanely and killed it without pain, would I accept this same treatment for myself?" — chatterbears
I am not okay with humans being raised humanely and killed without pain, because humans are smarter than animals ' - The trait you would be using here is "humans are smarter". So to lead to your logically consistent conclusion, would you allow that treatment for a human that is NOT smarter than the average human? Something similar to a severely autistic person, or a mentally handicapped person. Since those two types of people would have similar intelligence levels of a cow, is now okay to raise them humanely and kill them without pain? If you say no, then your position is inconsistent. — chatterbears
Veganism is the logically consistent conclusion you would reach, no matter what your subjective ethics consist of — chatterbears
That is the same as me asking you, "If we could raise humans humanely, but kill them without pain when they turn 20 years old, would you then condone that treatment? — chatterbears
1. Would you kill a severe mentally handicapped person to save a child?
2. Would you kill an animal to save a child?
Both answers are yes. Therefore I am not engaged into speciesism. — chatterbears
If it were possible to eliminate all suffering from the supply chain, would you then condone meat eating?
— jastopher
No, because an animal would still be getting killed, which doesn't allow the animal to live its natural life. — chatterbears
Eating insects is similar to eating animals. Why do it when it is not needed or necessary? Unless your survival rests on the diet of insects (or meat), there's no reason to do so. — chatterbears
Not only is it fallacious, it's also just a cheap ploy so as not to have to seriously consider their arguments. — NKBJ
One reason is that I’m interested in how every generation finds its passionate social causes. — apokrisis
I would just say that a cow is not human, and I empathize with humans but not with cows. I empathize with humans and not with pigs. I empathize with humans and not with fish. I don't think there is a single trait that separates us. We are all, after all, animals.
But if empathy is the basis for considering other beings moral agents, and compassion is a subset of empathy, then by your own trifecta, since I do not feel much empathy for these things, I wouldn't be logically inconsistent. — Moliere
I think the OP would include sympathy with empathy. Humans cannot empathize fully with pigs, but we can sympathize with them. And it is because we consider every other animal to be just a smelly brute that millions upon millions of animals are slaughtered every year without any regard for their status as living things.
One of the earliest things I struggled with as a kid with regard to animals was when learning about the Holocaust. The talk of the Jews and others being rounded up and sent on "cattle cars" was always distressing - is distressing - but I started to wonder why it was wrong for humans to be crammed in there but right for cattle? Why was it wrong to treat humans like cattle but also wrong to treat cattle like humans? — Buxtebuddha
When someone is in a "vegetative" state does that mean that vegetarians can eat them?The hypothetical I was referring to is where your point was presumably leading, which was food production whereby humans were turned into food which would have an appealing taste. If it wasn't leading to that, then it was leading nowhere. — Sapientia
It puts the ball in your court and calls into question what exactly it is about humans which causes many of us to unthinkingly assume that they're untouchable, that it would be out of the question under any circumstance. — Sapientia
Yours is a terrible analogy. — Michael
To the degree it said focus on a feeling, it was trying to limit rounded debate on the issue. It was simply an attempt to convert. — apokrisis
One reason is that I’m interested in how every generation finds its passionate social causes. — apokrisis
We avoid causing suffering on the basis of the ability to suffer. Since disabled people can suffer, it is wrong for me to cause it. Since cats can suffer, it is wrong for me to cause it. Causing unnecessary suffering is wrong. — NKBJ
In 1971, 1 percent of U.S. citizens described themselves as vegetarians.[119] In 2008 Harris Interactive found that 3.2% are vegetarian and 0.5% vegan,[120] while a 2013 Public Policy Polling survey of 500 respondents found that 13% of Americans are either vegetarian or vegan
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country
According to City A.M., research by Barclays reveals that those born between 1995 and 2005 (Generation Z) are way more into plant-based foods than previous generations, even millennials.
Yes, you read that right. Researchers find that Gen Z is buying loads of kale, tofu, avocados, quinoa, and dairy-free milk. How much more? They purchase 80 percent more kale, 57 percent more tofu, and a whopping 266 percent more avocados! And Generation Z consumes 550 percent more plant-based milk than Generation X.
As members of this generation grow older and start their careers and families, we can expect to really see a boom.
While significant, this increase is an extension of the consistent growth in veganism, especially over the past decade or so as millennials—the world’s largest generation—purchase their own food.
http://www.mercyforanimals.org/thought-millennials-were-vegan-af-meet-generatio
is not generally considered — Sapientia
That's just how it is for many people, and that's just how it will continue to be for quite some time yet, I predict. I don't forsee a 'veggie revolution' on the horizon. Your views represent a minority. — Sapientia
You can make your case until the cows come home, but at the end of the day me likes meat. :yum: — Sapientia
Any suffering which might be involved would be necessary for meat production. — Sapientia
meat production itself is not necessary. — NKBJ
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.