EPTIn the society I live in, and most people live in, people eat meat for pleasure. People eat food to survive, but most people eat meat rather than tofu, and other types of veggie proteins because they receive pleasure from the taste of meat. In order to eat that meat, an animal was put through the most intense forms of physical and emotional pain(in the forms of panic, fear etc..). What is essentially going on here is humans inflicting pain upon animals for personal pleasure. I see anyone causing others pain for personal pleasure as immoral. I understand people eating meat if it is necessary for them to survive, because now they are causing pain for their own survival, which in my opinion, is more justifiable. Many people argue that plants suffer too, but again, I eat plants to survive, (its not possible to survive without eating plants). It's also for this reason that I see eating as a duty, a service I perform to keep my body healthy. If anyone sees fault with my thought process please let me know.
Vegan Thread 3.0 - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Laerties
United States361 Posts
In the society I live in, and most people live in, people eat meat for pleasure. People eat food to survive, but most people eat meat rather than tofu, and other types of veggie proteins because they receive pleasure from the taste of meat. In order to eat that meat, an animal was put through the most intense forms of physical and emotional pain(in the forms of panic, fear etc..). What is essentially going on here is humans inflicting pain upon animals for personal pleasure. I see anyone causing others pain for personal pleasure as immoral. I understand people eating meat if it is necessary for them to survive, because now they are causing pain for their own survival, which in my opinion, is more justifiable. Many people argue that plants suffer too, but again, I eat plants to survive, (its not possible to survive without eating plants). It's also for this reason that I see eating as a duty, a service I perform to keep my body healthy. If anyone sees fault with my thought process please let me know. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On June 04 2011 05:45 Laerties wrote: Morals don't exist. I'm a vegetarian (at least try to keep my meat in-take to a minimum), but I don't think morality is a strong argument for anything whatsoever. You're basically just saying it's your opinion that you don't want to cause harm for pleasure. But it's clear that many people don't share that opinion. You're not gonna convince many people, nor cause any significant policy change using nothing other than morals to defend your position.I see anyone causing others pain for personal pleasure as immoral. I think there are good reasons to reduce how much meat you eat. Without needing to appeal to morals or subjective semantics. | ||
|
Lexpar
1813 Posts
| ||
|
SilentCrono
United States1420 Posts
On June 03 2011 23:37 minhchi1211 wrote: "you were once vegone, now you will be gone!" scott pilgrim <3 | ||
|
Laerties
United States361 Posts
On June 04 2011 05:53 VIB wrote: Morals don't exist. I'm a vegetarian (at least try to keep my meat in-take to a minimum), but I don't think morality is a strong argument for anything whatsoever. You're basically just saying it's your opinion that you don't want to cause harm for pleasure. But it's clear that many people don't share that opinion. You're not gonna convince many people, nor cause any significant policy change using nothing other than morals to defend your position. I think there are good reasons to reduce how much meat you eat. Without needing to appeal to morals or subjective semantics. What? I cant imagine that you are being literal. There are just so many things fundamentally wrong with what you said. The only reason for any form of law, rights, liberties, justice is the human desire to make the distinction between good and bad. Moral standards exist in this world. If morals don't exist, why don't you just go around stabbing people and stealing their things? Its not like anyone would think what you were doing was immoral or wrong. What I am saying is that it is fundamentally wrong, bad, unjustifiable to cause pain for personal pleasure, and it is my opinion that this fundamental injustice is significant enough for me to consider when I take action. I just cant understand how you would actually believe anything you just said. -_-. EDIT:+5 for being vegetarian though. | ||
|
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
Since many people in the world do not have access to meat on a regular basis like the West does, I thought it would be interesting to explore what they often eat on a regular basis. If you want something really really tasty, eat Indian food. Cheap, but good food does not always have to gormet. In fact, spices were so valuable at one point that people killed each other over it. Take advantage of the modern market and buy these items. | ||
|
Deadlyfish
Denmark1980 Posts
I get why you think it's not correct to cause pain to animals, that's a pretty good reason for being a vegetarian, but i dont get why the reason you're causing pain matters. It seems like you're not actually helping out the animal but instead your conscience? | ||
|
TrainFX
United States469 Posts
| ||
|
Hekisui
195 Posts
Why is TL such a magnet for deeply immoral people? A cow does care, btw. It's not like a rock. Were you born in 2000 BCE Greece or something? | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:12 Laerties wrote: I won't go stabbing people and stealing their things because I understand the logical consequences of doing so would end up causing me more harm then good. Not because I believe there's one un-contestable black or white definition of what's right or wrong.What? I cant imagine that you are being literal. There are just so many things fundamentally wrong with what you said. The only reason for any form of law, rights, liberties, justice is the human desire to make the distinction between good and bad. Moral standards exist in this world. If morals don't exist, why don't you just go around stabbing people and stealing their things? Its not like anyone would think what you were doing was immoral or wrong. What I am saying is that it is fundamentally wrong, bad, unjustifiable to cause pain for personal pleasure, and it is my opinion that this fundamental injustice is significant enough for me to consider when I take action. I just cant understand how you would actually believe anything you just said. -_-. EDIT:+5 for being vegetarian though. You're wrong in saying laws exist because of morals. It actually happens the other way around. We create laws because there are economic, political and social interest in having laws. These same interests also spawns people's opinion. Which are what you call "morals". Morals are just a consequence of society's interests. Not a cause. Morals changed through history, as the need for it changes. Each individual has his own opinion of what's moral. There is no universal definition of moral. Morals are an illusion created by humans to feel better about themselves. Most people here on TL agree with me too  http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=221799 on topic: there are good economic, political and social arguments for vegetarianism without appealing to "my morals are better than yours" ^^ | ||
|
Laerties
United States361 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:20 Deadlyfish wrote: I dont get why the reason you kill the cow matters. The cow doesnt care. It doesnt matter if you kill it to survive or to enjoy, it still dies, right? So you arent actually doing the cow a favor, you're doing yourself a favor by thinking that what you're doing is morally correct. I get why you think it's not correct to cause pain to animals, that's a pretty good reason for being a vegetarian, but i dont get why the reason you're causing pain matters. It seems like you're not actually helping out the animal but instead your conscience? I explained this in my post earlier but i'll try to be more explicit here. If you kill a cow to enjoy its meat, you are causing the cow pain for your own pleasure. If you kill a cow to survive, you are causing the cow pain so that you can continue living. One is much less ethical or moral than the other. Maybe the difference between the two would be clearer if you used a human example considering its much easier to empathize with other people. I think its pretty obvious that killing a person for pleasure is much less ethical than killing a person so that you yourself can survive. So, one is ethical and the other is not which is why the pain aspect matters. Also, when I say pain, I mean more suffering, the taking of life etc...not just the physical definition of pain. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. | ||
|
Hekisui
195 Posts
| ||
|
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
| ||
|
tadL
Croatia679 Posts
why should i? and no i like france. | ||
|
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:36 VIB wrote: I won't go stabbing people and stealing their things because I understand the logical consequences of doing so would end up causing me more harm then good. Not because I believe there's one un-contestable black or white definition of what's right or wrong. You're wrong in saying laws exist because of morals. It actually happens the other way around. We create laws because there are economic, political and social interest in having laws. These same interests also spawns people's opinion. Which are what you call "morals". Morals are just a consequence of society's interests. Not a consequence. Morals changed through history, as the need for it changes. Each individual has his own opinion of what's moral. There is no universal definition of moral. Morals are an illusion created by humans to feel better about themselves. Most people here on TL agree with me too http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=221799 on topic: there are good economic, political and social arguments for vegetarianism without appealing to "my morals are better than yours" ^^ Whether or not morals are subjective or objective isn't the same question as whether they exist or not and whether they have value or not. The fact that they are subjective doesn't undermine their value. Many epistemologists would argue that everything is subjective. Because you don't subscribe to a system of morals doesn't mean that the majority of other people don't. I find it hard to believe that anyone who doesn't suffer from a mental disorder could truly say that they don't have morals- that they won't do things because they believe they are wrong, not just because of a logical weighing or results. You're right tho that this thread should go back about vegetarianism. | ||
|
Ig
United States417 Posts
| ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:47 Lexpar wrote: Prrrfff... that's semantics. You agree with me, you just don't wanna admit that you do Whether or not morals are subjective or objective isn't the same question as whether they exist or not and whether they have value or not.  When I say "morals don't exist", I just mean that the idea of uncontestable universal morals everyone always agree with, doesn't exist. If you define the word as something else then it's just a semantic discussion that won't get us anywhere. | ||
|
Deadlyfish
Denmark1980 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:36 Laerties wrote: I explained this in my post earlier but i'll try to be more explicit here. If you kill a cow to enjoy its meat, you are causing the cow pain for your own pleasure. If you kill a cow to survive, you are causing the cow pain so that you can continue living. One is much less ethical or moral than the other. Maybe the difference between the two would be clearer if you used a human example considering its much easier to empathize with other people. I think its pretty obvious that killing a person for pleasure is much less ethical than killing a person so that you yourself can survive. So, one is ethical and the other is not which is why the pain aspect matters. Also, when I say pain, I mean more suffering, the taking of life etc...not just the physical definition of pain. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. Yea i understand, but my point was really that the cow doesnt care, at all. You're only doing it for your own conscience, right? If I kill 1000 cows, it wouldnt matter if i did it for pleasure or for survival, at least not to the cows. You could say that it was mean and wrong to kill them, and you would have a point. But to suggest that it matters to anyone but yourself why they were killed is silly. That is what i have a problem with. Your reasoning is based on some philosophical moral on what is wrong or right, but it doesnt help the animals at all, which is the whole point in the first place isnt it? If your moral was that "we shouldnt kill animals" then the reason for killing would be irrelevant. I get both points, i just have trouble understanding if you're being a vegetarian for your own good or for the good of the animal, because when people are just doing it to feel nice about themselves it kinda defeats the whole purpose imo, not that i mind it though. Hope I made a little more sense | ||
|
Laerties
United States361 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:36 VIB wrote: I won't go stabbing people and stealing their things because I understand the logical consequences of doing so would end up causing me more harm then good. Not because I believe there's one un-contestable black or white definition of what's right or wrong. You're wrong in saying laws exist because of morals. It actually happens the other way around. We create laws because there are economic, political and social interest in having laws. These same interests also spawns people's opinion. Which are what you call "morals". Morals are just a consequence of society's interests. Not a consequence. Morals changed through history, as the need for it changes. Each individual has his own opinion of what's moral. There is no universal definition of moral. Morals are an illusion created by humans to feel better about themselves. Most people here on TL agree with me too http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=221799 on topic: there are good economic, political and social arguments for vegetarianism without appealing to "my morals are better than yours" ^^ I am convinced that you are a psychopath. You start your post by saying you wouldn't kill someone, not because you think it is wrong, but because you are afraid of the consequences...... Seriously? It is true that laws are used to enforce peoples interests as you said, but most of the time people have interest in acting upon these things called empathy and compassion. When people see something wrong, they use their empathetic ability to recognize the emotions of the other person. They then have this thing called compassion which makes them feel bad that the other person is feeling those emotions. In order for them to feel good they need to correct the situation. This is where morals come in, they are principles used to identify what is wrong and what is right so that people can appropriately reciprocate. The reciprocation is executed in the form of the law which is why I said earlier that laws exist because of morality. So you see sir, morals aren't 'illusions', they are real reflections of human emotions (unless your a psychopath). EDIT: You mentioned earlier that when you say 'morals don't exist' your actually tying to say that morals are subjective. I don't know why you wouldn't just say morals are subjective but, whatever, its not like it makes your points 10x less clear. Anyway, I agree that morals are subjective to a certain extent but I'm hard pressed to believe you would find someone who says causing pain for personal pleasure is not immoral. | ||
|
Laerties
United States361 Posts
On June 04 2011 06:50 Ig wrote: Hey Laerties, you can eat exclusively meat and survive. Plant matter isn't "necessary" for human health and survival. It's true, just ask the Inuit peoples. Um.....people who are vegetarian don't eat meatttt sooooooo......... Also, If you had to make the choice between harming an animal or harming a plant to survive, I'm pretty certain you can be safe in your assumption that the plant is going to suffer less. | ||
| ||
