Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
User avatar
Empiricist-Bruno
Moderator
Posts: 579
Joined: July 15th, 2014, 1:52 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Berkeley
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Empiricist-Bruno »

Vegans disagree on many points but the use of the animal tested vaccine by many (probably most) vegans brings more than just another disagreement. It really divides the movement and this maybe a very good thing. That's what this post is about.

Vegans have always fought over nuances such as, "Is the consumption of honey non vegan because it's been mixed with the saliva of honeybees?" or "Is it wrong to argue for one day a week vegan when the only fair approach to veganism should be starting off completely vegan every day?" But now the question is should you take up a vaccine that has been tested on animals and still consider yourself a vegan? Opposing animal testing is not something vegans argue about. They/ we only argue about how to best go around to transform the world towards our ideals. One of the best approach to liberate animals is not to support with our dietary habits the farms that enslave and kill animals. So, how vegan is it to get an animal tested vaccine? Well, it's not vegan but major vegan organizations such as PETA still will argue that we wish this product was available without being animal tested and so, there are no other option here to get protection and so as long as we are unhappy about being forced to take the vaccine and continue to lobby the government to change the laws that mandate animal testing, we can still consider ourselves vegans while indulging in this exceptional product.

Ok, so the above appears to be the dominant thought on the matter right now by most vegans. But there are other vegans who think this is wrong, myself included.

After much inspired thoughts, I have come to the simple conclusion that those who are ok with the animal tested vaccine are simply not vegans, and I am saying this as someone with many friends who consider themselves vegans and who have agreed to get the vaccine. Yep, all these vaccinated friends of mine aren't vegans and the question for me has become: "what are they, then? "

Figuring my friend's motivation for going vegan while indulging in a non-vegan product helped me construct a plausible answer to that question. Their motivation, I figured, must be a mix of self-centered environmental concerns and a general love of loving the animals, so long as you are happy being friendly to them. So, if you can be happy fulfilling your needs without abusing animals, you will also be happy to speak for the animals you don't need to exploit, as a form of loving them. But when you start needing a product tested on animals, and you can see no other options, then loving animals becomes hard, and risky with your health and well-being, and so from having a friendly face, you just turn your back a second and let the scientists do their job, and then you just keep pretending nothing has happened.

Opportunists is perhaps the best way to describe vegans who aren't systematic and consistent in maintaining the vegan life-style. In my opinion, vegan opportunists aren't vegan at all because they don't understand veganism; what they understand is opportunism.

This pandemic has been good for me in the sense that I can look forward to distancing myself from the friends I used to have as I realize they would likely betray me any moment if an opportunity arose requiring them to do that. Maybe I should just focus more on being a better friends of those vegan friends of mine strong enough to resist all the pressure in getting the jab. I know of a few.

In the end, I realized that the opportunist vegan movement will continue to help achieve more conversions of people onto both veganism and opportunity veganism and so the opportunist vegan movement is good but just not good enough for me.

However, I do understand that opportunism is very popular in our world right now (especially in exploitative capitalistic countries) and so vegan opportunism may be more appealing to more people, and that may be a way by which vegan opportunism may prove to be better than my own favorite brand of 100% veganism.

Having said that, there still something in the back of my mine which I feel needs to be said: the apparent advantage of vegan opportunism may not really count that much and may impede real and true quick progress for animal rights: Which scientist will listen to the critique of groups of opportunistic vegans who use animal tested products themselves?

If instead, it were known that a massive chunk of the population remains unvaccinated because they are 100% vegans and the vaccine is tested on animals, then the laws enforcing animal testing would be quickly dropped and we'd be celebrating a huge victory for the animals and for a more peaceful world.
Be the machine that speaks against machines
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Ecurb »

Not all vegans are motivated by animal rights. Some may become vegans to support their own health. Others may be environmentalists who think eating animals wastes natural resources and pollutes the environment. It seems to me you are obsessed with thinking all vegans must have the same motives that you do.
User avatar
Empiricist-Bruno
Moderator
Posts: 579
Joined: July 15th, 2014, 1:52 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Berkeley
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Empiricist-Bruno »

Ecurb wrote: January 18th, 2022, 3:20 pm Not all vegans are motivated by animal rights. Some may become vegans to support their own health. Others may be environmentalists who think eating animals wastes natural resources and pollutes the environment. It seems to me you are obsessed with thinking all vegans must have the same motives that you do.
There are different dictionaries that will define a vegan differently for different reasons. Pretending to ignore what veganism really is may be an effective way to attempt to dismiss it.

If you want to know the true meaning of a word, I think it's best to look up at the definition given to it by the person or group of persons that popularized the usage. Donald Watson started using the word. At first, his critics said he would not survive on such a diet, so it was for the animals that he did it, and not for his own health.

So, the first self-described vegan was in it for animal rights. You can eat a plant-based diet without being a vegan and so why would you claim to be a vegan if that were the case? I can't think of any vegan or vegan opportunist friend of mine who didn't claim to be doing it for the animals. I do have an acquaintance who had a heart attack who took up a vegan diet but still could hardly care less about animals and therefore should be known as a vegan opportunist, if the word vegan needs to be used with him.

Veganism is commonly defined this way: "is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products, particularly in diet, and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals"

So, if you know people who care nothing for animals while abstaining from eating them or using their products, (honey too?) then you might want --in my opinion-- not to think of them as vegans, if you are knowledgeable about the subject. It makes a difference. For instance, honey is still plant based for instance, but a true vegan will dodge that product because of the exploitation of the bees that's involved in this...A plant based person who is not a vegan could eat it without contradicting any principle...

So, I think it's fair to disagree that the motivations of a person following a vegan diet are not relevant to whether or not a person is vegan or not. Everybody can eat a vegan meal and that doesn't make them vegan for that time period...
Be the machine that speaks against machines
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7914
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by LuckyR »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 18th, 2022, 1:47 pm Vegans disagree on many points but the use of the animal tested vaccine by many (probably most) vegans brings more than just another disagreement. It really divides the movement and this maybe a very good thing. That's what this post is about.

Vegans have always fought over nuances such as, "Is the consumption of honey non vegan because it's been mixed with the saliva of honeybees?" or "Is it wrong to argue for one day a week vegan when the only fair approach to veganism should be starting off completely vegan every day?" But now the question is should you take up a vaccine that has been tested on animals and still consider yourself a vegan? Opposing animal testing is not something vegans argue about. They/ we only argue about how to best go around to transform the world towards our ideals. One of the best approach to liberate animals is not to support with our dietary habits the farms that enslave and kill animals. So, how vegan is it to get an animal tested vaccine? Well, it's not vegan but major vegan organizations such as PETA still will argue that we wish this product was available without being animal tested and so, there are no other option here to get protection and so as long as we are unhappy about being forced to take the vaccine and continue to lobby the government to change the laws that mandate animal testing, we can still consider ourselves vegans while indulging in this exceptional product.

Ok, so the above appears to be the dominant thought on the matter right now by most vegans. But there are other vegans who think this is wrong, myself included.

After much inspired thoughts, I have come to the simple conclusion that those who are ok with the animal tested vaccine are simply not vegans, and I am saying this as someone with many friends who consider themselves vegans and who have agreed to get the vaccine. Yep, all these vaccinated friends of mine aren't vegans and the question for me has become: "what are they, then? "

Figuring my friend's motivation for going vegan while indulging in a non-vegan product helped me construct a plausible answer to that question. Their motivation, I figured, must be a mix of self-centered environmental concerns and a general love of loving the animals, so long as you are happy being friendly to them. So, if you can be happy fulfilling your needs without abusing animals, you will also be happy to speak for the animals you don't need to exploit, as a form of loving them. But when you start needing a product tested on animals, and you can see no other options, then loving animals becomes hard, and risky with your health and well-being, and so from having a friendly face, you just turn your back a second and let the scientists do their job, and then you just keep pretending nothing has happened.

Opportunists is perhaps the best way to describe vegans who aren't systematic and consistent in maintaining the vegan life-style. In my opinion, vegan opportunists aren't vegan at all because they don't understand veganism; what they understand is opportunism.

This pandemic has been good for me in the sense that I can look forward to distancing myself from the friends I used to have as I realize they would likely betray me any moment if an opportunity arose requiring them to do that. Maybe I should just focus more on being a better friends of those vegan friends of mine strong enough to resist all the pressure in getting the jab. I know of a few.

In the end, I realized that the opportunist vegan movement will continue to help achieve more conversions of people onto both veganism and opportunity veganism and so the opportunist vegan movement is good but just not good enough for me.

However, I do understand that opportunism is very popular in our world right now (especially in exploitative capitalistic countries) and so vegan opportunism may be more appealing to more people, and that may be a way by which vegan opportunism may prove to be better than my own favorite brand of 100% veganism.

Having said that, there still something in the back of my mine which I feel needs to be said: the apparent advantage of vegan opportunism may not really count that much and may impede real and true quick progress for animal rights: Which scientist will listen to the critique of groups of opportunistic vegans who use animal tested products themselves?

If instead, it were known that a massive chunk of the population remains unvaccinated because they are 100% vegans and the vaccine is tested on animals, then the laws enforcing animal testing would be quickly dropped and we'd be celebrating a huge victory for the animals and for a more peaceful world.
While your mind was opened by vaccines in the pandemic, these concepts are nowhere near new. Animal testing as an issue has been debated for a very long time, typically in the cosmetics and research fields.

If you remove individual's egos from the equation and ask the question differently: is it better for the total number of animals used by humans annually to be 55 billion or 45 billion? If your answer is always the lower number, then you should be interested in what is going to yield the lowest number. Based on my understanding of human psychology I don't believe insulting vegetarians because they aren't vegans and most vegans because they use vaccines isn't going to result in the lowest number.

In fact if you are interested in what single factor has led the most to the skyrocketing increase in animal use by humans, it is the increase in wealth in China. Here's a tip: if you multiply any number by 1.4 billion, it leads to a very big number.
"As usual... it depends."
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Belindi »

Ethical principles may be relativistic. For instance animal rights relate to the amount of cruelty inflicted on animals. Thus, it is worse to consume cattle that have endured many day's in transport to the abattoir than to consume cattle killed by an expert butcher near the farm.

Thus it's worse to eat fois gras than beef.Thus it's better to eat pink veal than white veal.

It's better to test on animals in laboratories that have independent spot inspections for animal welfare conditions for the experimental animals, and policies such as expert instant euthanasia for used- up animals.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8232
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 18th, 2022, 1:47 pm Vegans disagree on many points...
I'm sure they do, but this has to do with how they define their own label. Division among them is not philosophy, is it? Have I missed something?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Empiricist-Bruno
Moderator
Posts: 579
Joined: July 15th, 2014, 1:52 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Berkeley
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Empiricist-Bruno »

LuckyR wrote: January 19th, 2022, 4:27 am
Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 18th, 2022, 1:47 pm Vegans disagree on many points but the use of the animal tested vaccine by many (probably most) vegans brings more than just another disagreement. It really divides the movement and this maybe a very good thing. That's what this post is about.

Vegans have always fought over nuances such as, "Is the consumption of honey non vegan because it's been mixed with the saliva of honeybees?" or "Is it wrong to argue for one day a week vegan when the only fair approach to veganism should be starting off completely vegan every day?" But now the question is should you take up a vaccine that has been tested on animals and still consider yourself a vegan? Opposing animal testing is not something vegans argue about. They/ we only argue about how to best go around to transform the world towards our ideals. One of the best approach to liberate animals is not to support with our dietary habits the farms that enslave and kill animals. So, how vegan is it to get an animal tested vaccine? Well, it's not vegan but major vegan organizations such as PETA still will argue that we wish this product was available without being animal tested and so, there are no other option here to get protection and so as long as we are unhappy about being forced to take the vaccine and continue to lobby the government to change the laws that mandate animal testing, we can still consider ourselves vegans while indulging in this exceptional product.

Ok, so the above appears to be the dominant thought on the matter right now by most vegans. But there are other vegans who think this is wrong, myself included.

After much inspired thoughts, I have come to the simple conclusion that those who are ok with the animal tested vaccine are simply not vegans, and I am saying this as someone with many friends who consider themselves vegans and who have agreed to get the vaccine. Yep, all these vaccinated friends of mine aren't vegans and the question for me has become: "what are they, then? "

Figuring my friend's motivation for going vegan while indulging in a non-vegan product helped me construct a plausible answer to that question. Their motivation, I figured, must be a mix of self-centered environmental concerns and a general love of loving the animals, so long as you are happy being friendly to them. So, if you can be happy fulfilling your needs without abusing animals, you will also be happy to speak for the animals you don't need to exploit, as a form of loving them. But when you start needing a product tested on animals, and you can see no other options, then loving animals becomes hard, and risky with your health and well-being, and so from having a friendly face, you just turn your back a second and let the scientists do their job, and then you just keep pretending nothing has happened.

Opportunists is perhaps the best way to describe vegans who aren't systematic and consistent in maintaining the vegan life-style. In my opinion, vegan opportunists aren't vegan at all because they don't understand veganism; what they understand is opportunism.

This pandemic has been good for me in the sense that I can look forward to distancing myself from the friends I used to have as I realize they would likely betray me any moment if an opportunity arose requiring them to do that. Maybe I should just focus more on being a better friends of those vegan friends of mine strong enough to resist all the pressure in getting the jab. I know of a few.

In the end, I realized that the opportunist vegan movement will continue to help achieve more conversions of people onto both veganism and opportunity veganism and so the opportunist vegan movement is good but just not good enough for me.

However, I do understand that opportunism is very popular in our world right now (especially in exploitative capitalistic countries) and so vegan opportunism may be more appealing to more people, and that may be a way by which vegan opportunism may prove to be better than my own favorite brand of 100% veganism.

Having said that, there still something in the back of my mine which I feel needs to be said: the apparent advantage of vegan opportunism may not really count that much and may impede real and true quick progress for animal rights: Which scientist will listen to the critique of groups of opportunistic vegans who use animal tested products themselves?

If instead, it were known that a massive chunk of the population remains unvaccinated because they are 100% vegans and the vaccine is tested on animals, then the laws enforcing animal testing would be quickly dropped and we'd be celebrating a huge victory for the animals and for a more peaceful world.
If you remove individual's egos from the equation and ask the question differently: is it better for the total number of animals used by humans annually to be 55 billion or 45 billion? If your answer is always the lower number, then you should be interested in what is going to yield the lowest number.
I think that in veganism, there is no such question as the one you are formulating here because we feel that the misuse of animals is wrong. There is no low enough number that a vegan would think of as acceptable other than zero. Vegans want to lead by example and are definitely focused on avoiding providing economic support to industries that abuse animals. Mass killings of people will alleviate animal suffering but vegans would never consider this route to try and drop the number of billions of animal used by people. An opportunist might be interested in that tough. The vegans seek to do the right thing in a socially responsible manner.

Based on my understanding of human psychology I don't believe insulting vegetarians because they aren't vegans and most vegans because they use vaccines isn't going to result in the lowest number.
I'm glad you perceived my fact finding post insulting. As I mention in the post title, this issue is divisive. I find it important to raise this issue because I feel being pushed out, cast out of the vegan movement by opportunistic vegans --who aren't truly vegans--claiming that not getting the animal tested COVID-19 vaccine demonstrates a lack of concern for others and that this is not vegan.

So the opportunistic vegans have, as far as I am concerned, triggered me with that, and now I realized they need to be cleaned out of vegan circles completely. I am also realizing that a key aspect of being a good vegan should be to be on high alert in regards to opportunistic vegans. Real vegans need the right antibodies to recognize and fight them off. They form figuratively speaking an infection.

Whenever human organization arise, there will be opportunists around to try and take control of these organizations, even when these organizations are essentially opposed to opportunism itself. As a matter of fact, it will become a highly prized position for an opportunistic person to take control of organizations that fight opportunism because that way, they can neutralize the effectiveness and progress of the organization, just as is being done right now as we hear the leaders of the vegan movement say that the animal tested vaccine is okay to use by vegans.

So long as opportunists are finding it easy to control the vegans, the vegan movement will be stalled. This, by the way, is not limited to veganism. Opportunists are generally quite fond of capitalism and it's really capitalism that drives the increased wealth in China that you talk about. So, yes, launching sophisticated insults at opportunistic vegans may make more sense then you think.
Be the machine that speaks against machines
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Ecurb »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 12:57 pm
Whenever human organization arise, there will be opportunists around to try and take control of these organizations, even when these organizations are essentially opposed to opportunism itself. As a matter of fact, it will become a highly prized position for an opportunistic person to take control of organizations that fight opportunism because that way, they can neutralize the effectiveness and progress of the organization, just as is being done right now as we hear the leaders of the vegan movement say that the animal tested vaccine is okay to use by vegans.
Hmmm. I thought (silly me) that becoming vegan was a life style involving dietary choices. Apparently, I was wrong. According to EB it's a religion, and cannot tolerate heresy.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7914
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by LuckyR »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 12:57 pm
LuckyR wrote: January 19th, 2022, 4:27 am
Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 18th, 2022, 1:47 pm Vegans disagree on many points but the use of the animal tested vaccine by many (probably most) vegans brings more than just another disagreement. It really divides the movement and this maybe a very good thing. That's what this post is about.

Vegans have always fought over nuances such as, "Is the consumption of honey non vegan because it's been mixed with the saliva of honeybees?" or "Is it wrong to argue for one day a week vegan when the only fair approach to veganism should be starting off completely vegan every day?" But now the question is should you take up a vaccine that has been tested on animals and still consider yourself a vegan? Opposing animal testing is not something vegans argue about. They/ we only argue about how to best go around to transform the world towards our ideals. One of the best approach to liberate animals is not to support with our dietary habits the farms that enslave and kill animals. So, how vegan is it to get an animal tested vaccine? Well, it's not vegan but major vegan organizations such as PETA still will argue that we wish this product was available without being animal tested and so, there are no other option here to get protection and so as long as we are unhappy about being forced to take the vaccine and continue to lobby the government to change the laws that mandate animal testing, we can still consider ourselves vegans while indulging in this exceptional product.

Ok, so the above appears to be the dominant thought on the matter right now by most vegans. But there are other vegans who think this is wrong, myself included.

After much inspired thoughts, I have come to the simple conclusion that those who are ok with the animal tested vaccine are simply not vegans, and I am saying this as someone with many friends who consider themselves vegans and who have agreed to get the vaccine. Yep, all these vaccinated friends of mine aren't vegans and the question for me has become: "what are they, then? "

Figuring my friend's motivation for going vegan while indulging in a non-vegan product helped me construct a plausible answer to that question. Their motivation, I figured, must be a mix of self-centered environmental concerns and a general love of loving the animals, so long as you are happy being friendly to them. So, if you can be happy fulfilling your needs without abusing animals, you will also be happy to speak for the animals you don't need to exploit, as a form of loving them. But when you start needing a product tested on animals, and you can see no other options, then loving animals becomes hard, and risky with your health and well-being, and so from having a friendly face, you just turn your back a second and let the scientists do their job, and then you just keep pretending nothing has happened.

Opportunists is perhaps the best way to describe vegans who aren't systematic and consistent in maintaining the vegan life-style. In my opinion, vegan opportunists aren't vegan at all because they don't understand veganism; what they understand is opportunism.

This pandemic has been good for me in the sense that I can look forward to distancing myself from the friends I used to have as I realize they would likely betray me any moment if an opportunity arose requiring them to do that. Maybe I should just focus more on being a better friends of those vegan friends of mine strong enough to resist all the pressure in getting the jab. I know of a few.

In the end, I realized that the opportunist vegan movement will continue to help achieve more conversions of people onto both veganism and opportunity veganism and so the opportunist vegan movement is good but just not good enough for me.

However, I do understand that opportunism is very popular in our world right now (especially in exploitative capitalistic countries) and so vegan opportunism may be more appealing to more people, and that may be a way by which vegan opportunism may prove to be better than my own favorite brand of 100% veganism.

Having said that, there still something in the back of my mine which I feel needs to be said: the apparent advantage of vegan opportunism may not really count that much and may impede real and true quick progress for animal rights: Which scientist will listen to the critique of groups of opportunistic vegans who use animal tested products themselves?

If instead, it were known that a massive chunk of the population remains unvaccinated because they are 100% vegans and the vaccine is tested on animals, then the laws enforcing animal testing would be quickly dropped and we'd be celebrating a huge victory for the animals and for a more peaceful world.
If you remove individual's egos from the equation and ask the question differently: is it better for the total number of animals used by humans annually to be 55 billion or 45 billion? If your answer is always the lower number, then you should be interested in what is going to yield the lowest number.
I think that in veganism, there is no such question as the one you are formulating here because we feel that the misuse of animals is wrong. There is no low enough number that a vegan would think of as acceptable other than zero. Vegans want to lead by example and are definitely focused on avoiding providing economic support to industries that abuse animals. Mass killings of people will alleviate animal suffering but vegans would never consider this route to try and drop the number of billions of animal used by people. An opportunist might be interested in that tough. The vegans seek to do the right thing in a socially responsible manner.

Based on my understanding of human psychology I don't believe insulting vegetarians because they aren't vegans and most vegans because they use vaccines isn't going to result in the lowest number.
I'm glad you perceived my fact finding post insulting. As I mention in the post title, this issue is divisive. I find it important to raise this issue because I feel being pushed out, cast out of the vegan movement by opportunistic vegans --who aren't truly vegans--claiming that not getting the animal tested COVID-19 vaccine demonstrates a lack of concern for others and that this is not vegan.

So the opportunistic vegans have, as far as I am concerned, triggered me with that, and now I realized they need to be cleaned out of vegan circles completely. I am also realizing that a key aspect of being a good vegan should be to be on high alert in regards to opportunistic vegans. Real vegans need the right antibodies to recognize and fight them off. They form figuratively speaking an infection.

Whenever human organization arise, there will be opportunists around to try and take control of these organizations, even when these organizations are essentially opposed to opportunism itself. As a matter of fact, it will become a highly prized position for an opportunistic person to take control of organizations that fight opportunism because that way, they can neutralize the effectiveness and progress of the organization, just as is being done right now as we hear the leaders of the vegan movement say that the animal tested vaccine is okay to use by vegans.

So long as opportunists are finding it easy to control the vegans, the vegan movement will be stalled. This, by the way, is not limited to veganism. Opportunists are generally quite fond of capitalism and it's really capitalism that drives the increased wealth in China that you talk about. So, yes, launching sophisticated insults at opportunistic vegans may make more sense then you think.
Well, you didn't follow my first sentance about removing egos. This isn't about you, or subgroups or these "organizations" that seem to capture your imagination, it's about the animals and their welfare. I am certain that if 45 billion animals were under human control instead of 55 billion, the 10 billion "saved" would care a great deal and in my opinion so should you and everyone else.

Has it been your personal experience that telling folks who are trying to do the right thing that their efforts just aren't good enough, when there are billions doing the completely wrong thing right next to them, is an effective way of getting those folks to do better?
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Empiricist-Bruno
Moderator
Posts: 579
Joined: July 15th, 2014, 1:52 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Berkeley
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Empiricist-Bruno »

Belindi wrote: January 19th, 2022, 6:55 am Ethical principles may be relativistic. For instance animal rights relate to the amount of cruelty inflicted on animals. Thus, it is worse to consume cattle that have endured many day's in transport to the abattoir than to consume cattle killed by an expert butcher near the farm.

Thus it's worse to eat fois gras than beef.Thus it's better to eat pink veal than white veal.

It's better to test on animals in laboratories that have independent spot inspections for animal welfare conditions for the experimental animals, and policies such as expert instant euthanasia for used- up animals.
Cruelty, unlike right or wrong, comes in a matter of degrees. As I mentioned in the OP, vegans do argue about many things and some vegans don't believe in doing half jobs, or in having a "Vegan Monday" in order to reduce animal suffering. The suggestion of having 2 days a week vegan is essentially an opportunistic vegan's approach. People get to love it so much that they then move on to doing it the whole week! Opportunistic vegans don't do it for any other reason except fun and good taste, (they appear to want to stay away from ethical, or complex philosophical thoughts or logical reasoning) So the battles within vegan circles aren't new, but perhaps this pandemic puts these old battles in a new spotlight.

Opportunistic vegans would definitely be more comfortable with just easing cruelty a little as opposed to adressing head on the issue of right and wrong in regards to the abuse of animals. Their ways may turn out to be more effective, but in doing what?

The strictness of true veganism may prevent some from wanting to join. But you can get burned if you try and pretend to be something you aren't. Vegans are truly caring while for vegan opportunists it's just that way so long as the going is fun and easy.

So when you, as an opportunistic vegan, get vaccinated you may have grown attached to your fake vegan label, not realizing you were never truly that way and may feel troubled by being told you are a fake vegan and turn around and chase the true vegans that aren't vaccinated together with the rest of the non-vegan vaccinated population. It's so disgraceful that I think I would prefer as friends people who are openly non-vegan people to Covid-19 vaccinated opportunistic vegans. Nevertheless, I am not saying goodbye to any of my opportunistic vegan friends but I am planning to drift away from them now. I won't be a big loss to them. They can look forward to new and better friends than me for sure. That's how ugly and divisive this stuff gets.
Be the machine that speaks against machines
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Ecurb »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 1:58 pm

So when you, as an opportunistic vegan, get vaccinated you may have grown attached to your fake vegan label, not realizing you were never truly that way and may feel troubled by being told you are a fake vegan and turn around and chase the true vegans that aren't vaccinated together with the rest of the non-vegan vaccinated population. It's so disgraceful that I think I would prefer as friends people who are openly non-vegan people to Covid-19 vaccinated opportunistic vegans.
Heresy is always more roundly despised than atheism or agnosticism. To be a "true vegan", you must be born again!
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Belindi »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 1:58 pm
Belindi wrote: January 19th, 2022, 6:55 am Ethical principles may be relativistic. For instance animal rights relate to the amount of cruelty inflicted on animals. Thus, it is worse to consume cattle that have endured many day's in transport to the abattoir than to consume cattle killed by an expert butcher near the farm.

Thus it's worse to eat fois gras than beef.Thus it's better to eat pink veal than white veal.

It's better to test on animals in laboratories that have independent spot inspections for animal welfare conditions for the experimental animals, and policies such as expert instant euthanasia for used- up animals.
Cruelty, unlike right or wrong, comes in a matter of degrees. As I mentioned in the OP, vegans do argue about many things and some vegans don't believe in doing half jobs, or in having a "Vegan Monday" in order to reduce animal suffering. The suggestion of having 2 days a week vegan is essentially an opportunistic vegan's approach. People get to love it so much that they then move on to doing it the whole week! Opportunistic vegans don't do it for any other reason except fun and good taste, (they appear to want to stay away from ethical, or complex philosophical thoughts or logical reasoning) So the battles within vegan circles aren't new, but perhaps this pandemic puts these old battles in a new spotlight.

Opportunistic vegans would definitely be more comfortable with just easing cruelty a little as opposed to adressing head on the issue of right and wrong in regards to the abuse of animals. Their ways may turn out to be more effective, but in doing what?

The strictness of true veganism may prevent some from wanting to join. But you can get burned if you try and pretend to be something you aren't. Vegans are truly caring while for vegan opportunists it's just that way so long as the going is fun and easy.

So when you, as an opportunistic vegan, get vaccinated you may have grown attached to your fake vegan label, not realizing you were never truly that way and may feel troubled by being told you are a fake vegan and turn around and chase the true vegans that aren't vaccinated together with the rest of the non-vegan vaccinated population. It's so disgraceful that I think I would prefer as friends people who are openly non-vegan people to Covid-19 vaccinated opportunistic vegans. Nevertheless, I am not saying goodbye to any of my opportunistic vegan friends but I am planning to drift away from them now. I won't be a big loss to them. They can look forward to new and better friends than me for sure. That's how ugly and divisive this stuff gets.
I think the sort of vegan you are is you aim to save your own virtue before helping animals. I think it's best to be diplomatic,
User avatar
Empiricist-Bruno
Moderator
Posts: 579
Joined: July 15th, 2014, 1:52 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Berkeley
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Empiricist-Bruno »

LuckyR wrote: January 19th, 2022, 1:52 pm
Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 12:57 pm
LuckyR wrote: January 19th, 2022, 4:27 am
Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 18th, 2022, 1:47 pm Vegans disagree on many points but the use of the animal tested vaccine by many (probably most) vegans brings more than just another disagreement. It really divides the movement and this maybe a very good thing. That's what this post is about.

Vegans have always fought over nuances such as, "Is the consumption of honey non vegan because it's been mixed with the saliva of honeybees?" or "Is it wrong to argue for one day a week vegan when the only fair approach to veganism should be starting off completely vegan every day?" But now the question is should you take up a vaccine that has been tested on animals and still consider yourself a vegan? Opposing animal testing is not something vegans argue about. They/ we only argue about how to best go around to transform the world towards our ideals. One of the best approach to liberate animals is not to support with our dietary habits the farms that enslave and kill animals. So, how vegan is it to get an animal tested vaccine? Well, it's not vegan but major vegan organizations such as PETA still will argue that we wish this product was available without being animal tested and so, there are no other option here to get protection and so as long as we are unhappy about being forced to take the vaccine and continue to lobby the government to change the laws that mandate animal testing, we can still consider ourselves vegans while indulging in this exceptional product.

Ok, so the above appears to be the dominant thought on the matter right now by most vegans. But there are other vegans who think this is wrong, myself included.

After much inspired thoughts, I have come to the simple conclusion that those who are ok with the animal tested vaccine are simply not vegans, and I am saying this as someone with many friends who consider themselves vegans and who have agreed to get the vaccine. Yep, all these vaccinated friends of mine aren't vegans and the question for me has become: "what are they, then? "

Figuring my friend's motivation for going vegan while indulging in a non-vegan product helped me construct a plausible answer to that question. Their motivation, I figured, must be a mix of self-centered environmental concerns and a general love of loving the animals, so long as you are happy being friendly to them. So, if you can be happy fulfilling your needs without abusing animals, you will also be happy to speak for the animals you don't need to exploit, as a form of loving them. But when you start needing a product tested on animals, and you can see no other options, then loving animals becomes hard, and risky with your health and well-being, and so from having a friendly face, you just turn your back a second and let the scientists do their job, and then you just keep pretending nothing has happened.

Opportunists is perhaps the best way to describe vegans who aren't systematic and consistent in maintaining the vegan life-style. In my opinion, vegan opportunists aren't vegan at all because they don't understand veganism; what they understand is opportunism.

This pandemic has been good for me in the sense that I can look forward to distancing myself from the friends I used to have as I realize they would likely betray me any moment if an opportunity arose requiring them to do that. Maybe I should just focus more on being a better friends of those vegan friends of mine strong enough to resist all the pressure in getting the jab. I know of a few.

In the end, I realized that the opportunist vegan movement will continue to help achieve more conversions of people onto both veganism and opportunity veganism and so the opportunist vegan movement is good but just not good enough for me.

However, I do understand that opportunism is very popular in our world right now (especially in exploitative capitalistic countries) and so vegan opportunism may be more appealing to more people, and that may be a way by which vegan opportunism may prove to be better than my own favorite brand of 100% veganism.

Having said that, there still something in the back of my mine which I feel needs to be said: the apparent advantage of vegan opportunism may not really count that much and may impede real and true quick progress for animal rights: Which scientist will listen to the critique of groups of opportunistic vegans who use animal tested products themselves?

If instead, it were known that a massive chunk of the population remains unvaccinated because they are 100% vegans and the vaccine is tested on animals, then the laws enforcing animal testing would be quickly dropped and we'd be celebrating a huge victory for the animals and for a more peaceful world.
If you remove individual's egos from the equation and ask the question differently: is it better for the total number of animals used by humans annually to be 55 billion or 45 billion? If your answer is always the lower number, then you should be interested in what is going to yield the lowest number.
I think that in veganism, there is no such question as the one you are formulating here because we feel that the misuse of animals is wrong. There is no low enough number that a vegan would think of as acceptable other than zero. Vegans want to lead by example and are definitely focused on avoiding providing economic support to industries that abuse animals. Mass killings of people will alleviate animal suffering but vegans would never consider this route to try and drop the number of billions of animal used by people. An opportunist might be interested in that tough. The vegans seek to do the right thing in a socially responsible manner.

Based on my understanding of human psychology I don't believe insulting vegetarians because they aren't vegans and most vegans because they use vaccines isn't going to result in the lowest number.
I'm glad you perceived my fact finding post insulting. As I mention in the post title, this issue is divisive. I find it important to raise this issue because I feel being pushed out, cast out of the vegan movement by opportunistic vegans --who aren't truly vegans--claiming that not getting the animal tested COVID-19 vaccine demonstrates a lack of concern for others and that this is not vegan.

So the opportunistic vegans have, as far as I am concerned, triggered me with that, and now I realized they need to be cleaned out of vegan circles completely. I am also realizing that a key aspect of being a good vegan should be to be on high alert in regards to opportunistic vegans. Real vegans need the right antibodies to recognize and fight them off. They form figuratively speaking an infection.

Whenever human organization arise, there will be opportunists around to try and take control of these organizations, even when these organizations are essentially opposed to opportunism itself. As a matter of fact, it will become a highly prized position for an opportunistic person to take control of organizations that fight opportunism because that way, they can neutralize the effectiveness and progress of the organization, just as is being done right now as we hear the leaders of the vegan movement say that the animal tested vaccine is okay to use by vegans.

So long as opportunists are finding it easy to control the vegans, the vegan movement will be stalled. This, by the way, is not limited to veganism. Opportunists are generally quite fond of capitalism and it's really capitalism that drives the increased wealth in China that you talk about. So, yes, launching sophisticated insults at opportunistic vegans may make more sense then you think.
Well, you didn't follow my first sentance about removing egos. This isn't about you, or subgroups or these "organizations" that seem to capture your imagination, it's about the animals and their welfare. I am certain that if 45 billion animals were under human control instead of 55 billion, the 10 billion "saved" would care a great deal and in my opinion so should you and everyone else.

Has it been your personal experience that telling folks who are trying to do the right thing that their efforts just aren't good enough, when there are billions doing the completely wrong thing right next to them, is an effective way of getting those folks to do better?
In my opinion, veganism is more about interspecies ethics than about saving a few billions animals here and there.

Yes, I do remember going to a vegetarian food fair where they had a presentation by a woman named Karen who spent some time in the auditorium talking about the egg industry and caged chicken and yes, at that time I was trying to do the right thing and so I found out with her that I needed to do better, and that was over 10 years ago.
Be the machine that speaks against machines
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7914
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by LuckyR »

Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 4:03 pm
LuckyR wrote: January 19th, 2022, 1:52 pm
Empiricist-Bruno wrote: January 19th, 2022, 12:57 pm
LuckyR wrote: January 19th, 2022, 4:27 am

If you remove individual's egos from the equation and ask the question differently: is it better for the total number of animals used by humans annually to be 55 billion or 45 billion? If your answer is always the lower number, then you should be interested in what is going to yield the lowest number.
I think that in veganism, there is no such question as the one you are formulating here because we feel that the misuse of animals is wrong. There is no low enough number that a vegan would think of as acceptable other than zero. Vegans want to lead by example and are definitely focused on avoiding providing economic support to industries that abuse animals. Mass killings of people will alleviate animal suffering but vegans would never consider this route to try and drop the number of billions of animal used by people. An opportunist might be interested in that tough. The vegans seek to do the right thing in a socially responsible manner.

Based on my understanding of human psychology I don't believe insulting vegetarians because they aren't vegans and most vegans because they use vaccines isn't going to result in the lowest number.
I'm glad you perceived my fact finding post insulting. As I mention in the post title, this issue is divisive. I find it important to raise this issue because I feel being pushed out, cast out of the vegan movement by opportunistic vegans --who aren't truly vegans--claiming that not getting the animal tested COVID-19 vaccine demonstrates a lack of concern for others and that this is not vegan.

So the opportunistic vegans have, as far as I am concerned, triggered me with that, and now I realized they need to be cleaned out of vegan circles completely. I am also realizing that a key aspect of being a good vegan should be to be on high alert in regards to opportunistic vegans. Real vegans need the right antibodies to recognize and fight them off. They form figuratively speaking an infection.

Whenever human organization arise, there will be opportunists around to try and take control of these organizations, even when these organizations are essentially opposed to opportunism itself. As a matter of fact, it will become a highly prized position for an opportunistic person to take control of organizations that fight opportunism because that way, they can neutralize the effectiveness and progress of the organization, just as is being done right now as we hear the leaders of the vegan movement say that the animal tested vaccine is okay to use by vegans.

So long as opportunists are finding it easy to control the vegans, the vegan movement will be stalled. This, by the way, is not limited to veganism. Opportunists are generally quite fond of capitalism and it's really capitalism that drives the increased wealth in China that you talk about. So, yes, launching sophisticated insults at opportunistic vegans may make more sense then you think.
Well, you didn't follow my first sentance about removing egos. This isn't about you, or subgroups or these "organizations" that seem to capture your imagination, it's about the animals and their welfare. I am certain that if 45 billion animals were under human control instead of 55 billion, the 10 billion "saved" would care a great deal and in my opinion so should you and everyone else.

Has it been your personal experience that telling folks who are trying to do the right thing that their efforts just aren't good enough, when there are billions doing the completely wrong thing right next to them, is an effective way of getting those folks to do better?
In my opinion, veganism is more about interspecies ethics than about saving a few billions animals here and there.

Yes, I do remember going to a vegetarian food fair where they had a presentation by a woman named Karen who spent some time in the auditorium talking about the egg industry and caged chicken and yes, at that time I was trying to do the right thing and so I found out with her that I needed to do better, and that was over 10 years ago.
I believe that you are being completely honest in your reply. Though your take (and thus the applicability) on these issues is uncommon.
"As usual... it depends."
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Pandemic highlights divisions among vegans

Post by Belindi »

Cruelty to 'farm' animals is a given. Also a given is none of us here aims to be cruel.

So the aim of us all must be how best to lessen the cruelty. The appropriate discipline is social psychology. Social psychologists are experts in how people influence each other.
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021