How do you, as a meat-eater, justify the violence inherent in your food?

[Harovan]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
But I AM going to critique the silly arguments being made against Aneeshm here.

Fair enough, although I would accept the human nature as omnivore (which is undisputed AFAIK), and maybe Wycoffs argument that nourishing on animal proteins made us humans by letting our brain grow, as sufficient explanation.

Ethicality is a standard made by rational beings and can be solely applied to beings that are likewise rational, at least potentially (and don't even try to bring up newborns or mentally ill here). I think it comes down to Tacc's formula (albeit probably written in jest): The day I will discover that cows or pigs are rational beings, I will stop to eat them, because, well, ethicality tells me so. Until then I will behave like mother nature programmed me (since I don't have a god).

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


Fair enough, although I would accept the human nature as omnivore (which is undisputed AFAIK), and maybe Wycoffs argument that nourishing on animal proteins made us humans by letting our brain grow, as sufficient explanation.

Er, vegetarianism does not imply veganism. One can still eat animal proteins.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


I assert no true moralityon this question. I merely question the "its ok to eat them cause theyre dumb" assertion, at least without a fuller explanation of why that is relevant. I can think of a few, but it doesnt seem to me that most who go to that assertion have done so.

When it comes to ethical systems, it doesn't need to be "relevant" - "relevance" is almost an absurd criterion to apply when it comes to critiquing moral systems. Many people make an arbitrary determination that they assign moral weight given absolute intelligence. They need no further justification than this. Some people make an arbitrary determination that the "homo sapiens sapiens" is to be assigned more moral weight by the fact of its biology (or "spirituality", if you are inclined like that).

Whether they apply their moral system in a consistent fashion or not is a different question, and you can be as outraged and disgusted by whatever moral assumptions another person chooses to make, but to attempt to attack it by saying "Oh, well, that has no basis in reality" is somewhat lol.

[Asher]

For the record, what's wrong with violence? It's nature, baby.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Ethicality is a standard made by rational beings and can be solely applied to beings that are likewise rational,

I dont see why. Ethics is a standard of all conduct, and can apply to any obligations, not just to those to other rational beings. Kant is great, but its not the only conceivable basis for ethics.


Would you consider it ethical to torture animals? If not, why not?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Its not at all clear that theres any logical relationship between intelligence and consumability. Its basically a post hoc rationalization. If we found that tasty animals could do calculus, we'd come up with a different rationale, without a doubt.

Bull****. I don't eat people, and I'm sure they taste good.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher
For the record, what's wrong with violence? It's nature, baby.

Go back to playing Gears of War.

[Flubber]

hmmm

This thread is making me hungry. Steak for lunch it is !!!!

I have never tried to justify the things I eat. While I have no problems with vegetarians and as a good host would always try to create good dishes for them, it is not my choice. Arguments that " Eating meat is disgusting" is merely an opinion with no persuasive value at all.

I very much enjoy meat and have no moral qualms at all about consuming it.

If space aliens decide that it is compatible with their moral code to eat us, then I guess we are stuck with trying to fight a technologically superior race. It would be no different than if they decided to kill us all since they found our religions offensive or something. We cannot be reposnisble for what space aliens might find as offensive or what they may use as a justification for eating us. The alien's moral code will be their own.

[KrazyHorse]

By the way, I don't eat primates or dolphin either, and wouldn't try them. They're too close to the line for me to be comfortable with eating them when there are other food sources available.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Er, vegetarianism does not imply veganism. One can still eat animal proteins.

Correct. Milk is acceptable. So are eggs, if you're not strict about it. I personally don't eat eggs because of the disgust factor (it IS a chicken's abortion/foeticide, after all), but I used to earlier. This little caveat exists only for unfertilised eggs, not fertilised ones.

As such, it is very easily possible to gain all the protein you need from vegetables. It doubtless helps to have evolved a cuisine adopted to vegetarianism for over one and half millennia.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Bull****. I don't eat people, and I'm sure they taste good.

Lovely for you. You probably dont run around in a loin cloth or paint your face with stripes either.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Go back to playing Gears of War.

Go back to reading about dead jews.

[Arrian]

I almost made that post, KH. Me too - primates & dolphins are out.

I fully acknowledge that the line between acceptable food and "intelligent animal that I think is cool" is fuzzy.

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

(it IS a chicken's abortion/foeticide, after all)

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

[Arrian]

Mmmm... chicken abortion....

-Arrian