Nope, you still fail to address my concerns. Both of you have. It's a pretty simple request that someone be clear about their metaethics before continuing a conversation about applied ethics... His refusal to answer and his ungallant retort to this request were the end of the actual discussion. Everything else since has just been passing time amusingly. — Artemis
Since you, however, seem to have nothing yourself to add to the discussion, I will leave the two of you to your unfolding love story. — Artemis
If we agree to that standard then it holds true. It's that simple. There is no ultimate moral code, we answer to no-one but ourselves and natural circumstance. If we must use other animals for a good reason - and there seem to be such reasons - then it is up to us to decide whether we should to do that ethically. — Graeme M
What are "good reasons" and what does it mean to do something "ethically" if we answer to "no one but ourselves" and there is "no ultimate moral code"? You are, in the space of a single paragraph, jumping from radical moral relativism to the ideal of an objective morality--or at least are being so sloppy with your language that you seem to be doing this. — Artemis
One is crop related harms, which to my mind extends beyond just harvesting deaths. I have had a pretty fair go at tackling this and have read about all the genuine literature that seems to be out there and in the end, I think it probably is the case that not eating any animals comes out ahead (but only when we factor in farmed and wild-caught aquatic animals as well), but it's by no means a secure case. I think someone eating only range grazed beef and lamb could be doing less harm overall than an urban vegan, especially when we consider related factors such as ecological and environmental impacts. — Graeme M
evangelical vegans/advocates.
In the end, while I would like to see the world move to the least possible use and harm of other animals that we can attain, I don't know that the goal has to be abolitionism or even animal rights in the manner so many appear to endorse. Perhaps veganism could have greater influence if it were encouraged and expounded in a more genuinely meaningful way than by blind adherence to an often ill-considered ideology. — Graeme M
For one, I don't think it makes sense to compare the impact of the diets of a rural meat-eater with an urban vegan. — Artemis
I do believe in animal welfare though. It is morally ok for us to eat meat if the meat is properly sourced and the animals are not simply being locked up in cages and being fed nothing but steroids. — Grievous
The word “speciesism” is modeled after “racism” and “sexism” and refers to the belief that one’s own kind is inherently better and more valuable than other kinds. It is a prejudice that favors one’s own just because it is one’s own, presumably without rationally considering their real merits. (A person is not a racist if he thinks his own race is inferior.)It seems funny to me than an accusation of someone being a "speciest" (sp?) is considered a serious accusation — BitconnectCarlos
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.