Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-04-2012, 06:34 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
I don't know why (radical)veggies go ape shit on you when you eat a piece of juicy, succulent meat smothered in gravy with crispy potatoes...

(Sorry for the food porn)

[Image: boston-terrier-gets-scared.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like tazmin98's post
28-04-2012, 06:36 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(28-04-2012 06:34 PM)tazmin98 Wrote:  I don't know why (radical)veggies go ape shit on you when you eat a piece of juicy, succulent meat smothered in gravy with crispy potatoes...

(Sorry for the food porn)
Especially when that succulent meat is Baby!

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Erxomai's post
28-04-2012, 06:58 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(28-04-2012 06:36 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(28-04-2012 06:34 PM)tazmin98 Wrote:  I don't know why (radical)veggies go ape shit on you when you eat a piece of juicy, succulent meat smothered in gravy with crispy potatoes...

(Sorry for the food porn)
Especially when that succulent meat is Baby!
mmm...baby

Look at it even the Pope can't resist it.
[Image: Delicious-baby.jpg]

[Image: boston-terrier-gets-scared.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes tazmin98's post
28-04-2012, 07:57 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Derailing a serious discussion, and people wonder why I have been calling people spouting trivial comments idiots.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes NotSoVacuous's post
28-04-2012, 08:07 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(28-04-2012 07:57 PM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  Derailing a serious discussion, and people wonder why I have been calling people spouting trivial comments idiots.
Big Grin

[Image: boston-terrier-gets-scared.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2012, 08:36 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2012 09:19 PM by Mr Woof.)
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(28-04-2012 06:34 PM)tazmin98 Wrote:  I don't know why (radical)veggies go ape shit on you when you eat a piece of juicy, succulent meat smothered in gravy with crispy potatoes...

(Sorry for the food porn)
Radical animal liberationists may "go ape" over minor aspects of flesh eating.

There is a huge difference between meat food factories where suffering is virtually created to fill the bellies of meat addicts. Sure, nature is intrinsically cruel, we need to defend ourselves from vermin, and eat some meat if we want.

The whole issue relating to a base line seems to revolve about intensity.
Is it nice to have quivering dogs, presented to your table to choose the juiciest? Fear is said to make the animal more tender.

Animal cruelty is indicative of a thoughtless, consumer crazed society that knows no bounds, demanding more and more stimulation with disregard for the suffering of others and that includes animals.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2012, 08:52 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Hey, NSV.

Quote:Now I am not claiming the refraining from eating meat is right. I am
demonstrating that no one here has a better reason against it other than
trivial self interest.

Wow. That was really well put. I appreciated your post. It was insightful. Cheers.

For the people crapping on this particular point, I don't know how many times I've heard "because meat is delicious" not only in my life, but in this thread. Sure it is, but that's not a very worthwhile argument and what I feel NSV is saying is that we expect better arguments for other things, why not this.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2012, 09:24 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Quote: My talks probably do appear abrasive, but the abrasion is only related to the dodging of my points. It is also related to the continuation of using appeals to nature. I have laid the case out over and over again that this is not a valid justification, and it is only used in a biased manner for self interest. I have yet had anyone argue that this is not the case. They pick and choose where they want to apply the justification of nature in their life; I contend it does not work this way, not in a right and wrong ethical standpoint.
I have not dodged any of your points. You dodge mine because you have made yourself believe that I'm ignorant before even reading my first post on this subject. You continue to ignore me because you make yourself believe I lack intelligence. You have laid out a case and that's it. You laid it out. Just because you say it refutes other's points doesn't mean it actually does.

Quote: We are animals. We, like all other animals, were in a "eat or be eaten" world. We have recently surpassed this stage with our superior intellect. We are now capable of understanding why we are here, and we are able to manipulate the very thing that "created" us--evolution. We are no longer restricted to the rules of nature except for disease and--hopefully not for long--death. We can create our own options for how our days/lives will go. We have abstract thinking that corrects injustices that otherwise would just be viewed as natural; eating meat is one of these injustices--among others.
This is a very arrogant statement. What is the measure of intelligence? It's easy to call ourselves more intelligent than other animals. Does putting up telescopes into Earth's lower orbit mean we are intelligent? How much do you know about the intelligence of all other living species? Did you know that other great apes have the ability to recognize themselves in the mirror? Did you know there are animals like Elephants that mourn the death of their offspring or pack member? Just to note... apes are omnivores.

Quote: Although being natural, we demand better justification. The same applies to laws that prohibit having sex with children. The same goes with not being a sexist. The same goes with brushing our teeth and taking medicine, and the same goes with wearing clothes. The list goes on. Everything in our lives demand a higher justification. We think, we debate, we change. It is a process; a process many are refusing to adhere to.
Let's examine our closest kin, the great apes. I will say I am unsure, but want to ask you if you are familiar with their mating system. I do know that the alpha male has multiple mates. What I am unsure of is how old these mates are. From memory of reading/watching documentaries on apes, I do not recall them having very young mates if they themselves are not young.

What do you define as "children" anyway in this context? A sexually mature minor or one that isn't sexually matured? Why is it wrong for an older person to have sexual relations with a sexually mature minor? Disregard law for a minute and answer that question. In this scenario, the parents consent to it (this does happen by the way).

What do you know about the history of oral care in our species? I know that many animals do/eat certain things to maintain oral care. The difference with us is that we are consciously taking care of our teeth rather than following instinct. And as I alluded to previously, we cannot be sure no other animal consciously partakes in these types of activities.

Medicine... even dogs eat grass for digestive reasons.

Clothes... I said this already... once our ancestors lost their body hair, they needed something to keep warm.

Quote: Now I am not claiming the refraining from eating meat is right. I am demonstrating that no one here has a better reason against it other than trivial self interest. If no one can defend it, then fine. Admit that. But when I repeatably demonstrate the holes that are in appeals to nature. And when I explain that perception has no bearing on what is right and what is wrong, I am demonstrating that the injustice is still there whether it is acknowledged or not. The same goes for the tree falling in the woods. Just because someone is not present, does not mean that there is not a sound. Just because someone does not perceive the suffering of the animal, does not mean that it does not suffer.
You keep saying self-interest is trivial, but why is it as you claim? And why do you insinuate that self-interest isn't good enough? The major flaw with your whole argument in my opinion is that you make analogies only involving our actions as humans and towards other humans. The reason why I believe it to be flawed is because we aren't discussing cannibalism here. We are eating other animals. Things like pedophilia involve harm to our own species.

Another reason I find your argument flawed is because you assume a natural explanation isn't good enough for eating meat because it isn't good enough for many other things. You don't even consider that maybe a natural explanation is ONLY GOOD FOR eating meat. I'm not saying this is the case, just pointing out a real possibility.

I still do not see justification for being a vegan. Vegans go against a PRIMAL urge. Meat eating is not a product of our intellect. It's a necessity for nutrients.

I also don't see my point being addressed about how vegans are only vegans because they have the luxury to be so.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2012, 02:05 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(28-04-2012 05:57 PM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
(28-04-2012 04:49 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  NSV still has not answered my question. Is nature immoral? I know that the nature argument is "over", but I still want that question answered.
Yes, nature in my eyes is very immoral. Millions and millions of years it has been nothing but constant struggle, fear, and pain.
(28-04-2012 04:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  Your requiring a justification for the argument from nature is backwards. You are the "doer", the one making the claim.
We evolved as omnivores and you are saying that we should change that.
You might be correct on this. Nevertheless, I have offered arguments for why I suggest we need to change.

Quote:The pedophile argument is specious. This isn't natural; the child is not biologically ready.
A child at the age of 10-11 fully capable of a sex drive and the ability to reproduce isn't natural? Please explain.
Quote:Self interest is not trivial.
It is when the self interest I am referring to is merely a preference of what someone's dinner tastes like at the expense of unimaginable suffering.


BTW, how about acknowledging the fact that animals feel pain. I linked you a video, and I would like to hear you correct your statement or tell me your view of what the pig might actually be feeling at that point. Post #122.
Life is natural, is it not?

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2012, 06:10 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Owning a slave or raping a woman, I am sure, are considered great things by the slave owners and rapists. But we don't accept these things. We demand arguments better than, and here's where I think NSV is talking about self-interest, because me wantie.

I think the obvious argument is, well these are things that harm other people. I agree. But I think there is a case to extend that same protection to animals. Human exceptionalism tells us fuck that, we're special, we aren't a part of the environment, we can do what we want, they are property, no more. But human exceptionalism is a crock of shit. This is not to say that eating meat necessarily "harms" other animals (accepting that we're taking a life every time we do it) but that our empathy can be extended to animals. This is why so many hunter societies thank the spirit of the killed animal because they understand that they have taken a life and, thanks to the fact that they have extended their empathy to other species, they understand the gravity of that. But factory farming is torture. If we extend our empathy to other species, then we have to accept that that sort of thing is unacceptable. It's just as bad, if not worse, than rape or slavery.

When the argument "yeah, but meat is tasty" is given, I think that we can ask "does the 'me wantie' argument suffice here?" When the argument "humans are supposed to/designed to eat meat" is given, does that invalidate the question, not of meat eating in general, but of factory farming in partucular? Does the self-interested desire to eat meat trump the torture we subject factory farmed animals to?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: