Eating Animals

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 4728
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Diogenes the Cynic
Contact:

Post by Scott »

Fpoiuyt wrote: But even then there's nothing wrong with an individual eating meat/dairy every now and then: it doesn't contribute to animal suffering. And if everyone reduces their meat/dairy consumption only by 90%, that's a huge improvement. Lots of vegans, I gather, are purists: they would say that a 90% reduction is morally comparable to no reduction at all. But it seems obvious to me that a 90% reduction is a lot closer to a 100% reduction: it's basically a victory.
I'm a vegan, and I do think that a 90% reduction is much more preferable than no reduction. But I do think you are right that some vegans take too purist of a stance.

I think that is an important point though that applies to many issues of human conduct. It seems people too often take an "all or nothing" type of stance. For example, consider all the "zero tolerance policies" that various organizations have. For example, some schools treat bringing a loaded gun to school the same as bringing a plastic knife to school. This purist type of thinking is often fallacious and counter-productive.

For the case at hand, we can save more animals from suffering by convincing 100 people to cut their their meat-eating in half than by convincing 2 people to cut it completely. But a purist approach would cause us to incorrectly value the 2 people's complete change as more than the 100 people's half change, which is clearly incorrect.

Thanks,
Scott
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
Invictus_88
Posts: 597
Joined: September 5th, 2007, 4:25 am
Contact:

Post by Invictus_88 »

But if meat eating doesn't cause significant suffering, then why not?

The best arguments employed by Vegans are ones that are best used in support of better minimum conditions for farm animals.
User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 4728
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Diogenes the Cynic
Contact:

Post by Scott »

Invictus_88 wrote:But if meat eating doesn't cause significant suffering, then why not?
I think vegans and vegetarians do not eat animals for the same reasons they do not eat humans even if it "doesn't cause significant suffering." For one, they may not want to needlessly slaughter animals (both humans and non-human animals). Also, they may be disgusted by the idea. Also, they may have health concerns.
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
Invictus_88
Posts: 597
Joined: September 5th, 2007, 4:25 am
Contact:

Post by Invictus_88 »

My objection to farming people for food would be that they have amazing potential to change the world. The same is not true of animals. The same is also true for the less industrial 'shooting of wild specimens'.

And further to that, eating anything in one's own genetic pool is fraught with risk, especially where nervous tissue is concerned.
User avatar
pjkeeley
Posts: 695
Joined: April 10th, 2007, 8:41 am

Post by pjkeeley »

I read not long ago about scientists developing the ability to clone meat for food production. Not animals mind you, just meat. So, in creating this meat genetically, no animal is harmed.

My question to vegetarians is: would you eat the meat?
anarchyisbliss
Posts: 515
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 4:23 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by anarchyisbliss »

I agree with the guy who said you pay to have the animal murdered, but it is immoral and animal flesh wasn't meant for human consumption and personally i don't even think it tastes good i just eat because its cheap and im a poor teenager
anarchyisbliss
Posts: 515
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 4:23 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by anarchyisbliss »

Stoan wrote:I think the major thing PETA bases this argument on is the fact of whether or not the animal can feel pain and/or fear. That particular take depends on how much you know about animal anatomy. Taking the stand that mammals can feel pain may yield other conclusions.
Like what?
"If there is hope, it lies in the proles." - George Orwell, 1984
AlexHartfelt
Posts: 2
Joined: March 30th, 2008, 6:25 am

Post by AlexHartfelt »

Well i guess the technical definition of murder would look something like: The deliberate killing of lifeforms that is: 1. not a direct threat to the murderer, and 2. who's death is not vital in the continued survival of the murderer.
Given this definition, then meat-eating in the developed world of industrial production and factory farm IS murder, since it IS an option to survive and be both healthy and fit, without the need to kill animals (And any nutritionist not paid by KFC or the like, will agree on this, even though it will require slightly better insight into what our bodies need and what plants can supply, than what is probably common in the broader circles of society).
Regarding meat-eating in areas where plant-based nutrition would be impossible (either very poor or very cold/dry areas,)well that cannot really be considered murder since one lifeform is dependent upon to death of another in order to survive.
But, to be frank the whole murder/not murder thing is not really that important to me. There are plenty of very good reasons not to eat meat if one have access to a wide variety of plant-based foods, one of the more heavy being the obvious better resource/protein-ratio, lower polution and in general a form of production that quite simple induces less pain, as farm animal do suffer before they are "murdered".
anarchyisbliss
Posts: 515
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 4:23 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by anarchyisbliss »

PhalThrax wrote:I do not eat meat because I do not view animals as subordinates to us. As pseudo-hippie as that may sound, I have felt this way for many years.
I agree, I believe all life forms have an equal place on this Earth.
"If there is hope, it lies in the proles." - George Orwell, 1984
keith24
Posts: 8
Joined: December 31st, 2007, 7:09 pm

Post by keith24 »

Human beings are by nature omnivores. Our bodies evolved over thousands of years during the hunter-gatherer phase of our history to live on meats and scavenged/gathered vegetable products. To argue that we should not eat meat is to argue that we are somehow outside nature. There weren't too many loaves of bread out there to be gathered in pre-agriculture times. Do animals have rights? I would say yes. Do their rights supercede ours? I'm not too sure... There is some very thoughtful work on this subject by Peter Singer if the debate is interesting to you.
godard
Posts: 5
Joined: May 14th, 2008, 11:42 pm

Post by godard »

One of the questions that always brings me to a screeching hault when considering this dilemma is the question of necessity. If every single human on earth stopped eating meat, would there be enough nutrition to exist without a consiberable decrease in progress? If yes, then one could be convinced that, assuming the non-existance of any objective moral norms on the subject, that it would be extremely immoral to kill and eat animals for food. If not, than I can easily see its morality being upheld.
anarchyisbliss
Posts: 515
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 4:23 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by anarchyisbliss »

godard wrote:One of the questions that always brings me to a screeching hault when considering this dilemma is the question of necessity. If every single human on earth stopped eating meat, would there be enough nutrition to exist without a consiberable decrease in progress? If yes, then one could be convinced that, assuming the non-existance of any objective moral norms on the subject, that it would be extremely immoral to kill and eat animals for food. If not, than I can easily see its morality being upheld.
Actually, yes. Without eating animals one could easily survive and make "progress" whatever you mean by that. The truth is that there are actually fewer people on this planet who eat meat than who don't. However, in the United States and in neighboring countries we don't see that, but go to most of Africa and Asia and Australia and you will find that the people there treat flesh as more of a delicacy than a part of their diet.
"If there is hope, it lies in the proles." - George Orwell, 1984
User avatar
pjkeeley
Posts: 695
Joined: April 10th, 2007, 8:41 am

Post by pjkeeley »

go to most of Africa and Asia and Australia and you will find that the people there treat flesh as more of a delicacy than a part of their diet.
I live in Australia and must protest: this is false. The majority of people here eat meat.
anarchyisbliss
Posts: 515
Joined: February 28th, 2008, 4:23 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by anarchyisbliss »

pjkeeley wrote:
go to most of Africa and Asia and Australia and you will find that the people there treat flesh as more of a delicacy than a part of their diet.
I live in Australia and must protest: this is false. The majority of people here eat meat.
Not to sound condescending, but do you live everywhere in Australia? Or in Africa and Asia? For example I live in the United States in the Baltimore Metropolitan area, and most people here do eat meat, but there re areas of the country where meat is not in high demand, or in easy access. It may be true that in your part of Australia people regularly consume meat, especially if its a metropolitan area, but many other people either do not or can not, and that comment I made was mostly focused in Africa and Asia. The point I was making is that meat is not necessary to life and that there are entire groups of people who are "living" proof of that. But thank you for your Eastern point of view. :D
"If there is hope, it lies in the proles." - George Orwell, 1984
iron
Posts: 7
Joined: May 30th, 2008, 11:22 am

Post by iron »

I don't believe that eating animals is wrong. I do have a problem with the companies that produce the meat . I there for only buy organic free range chicken and do not by any beef (only buffalo). The same goes for my eggs and all other dairy. This is more because of a hatred of corporate bottom line practices of animal cruelty threw out the animals life than the actually killing itself.
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

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