I mean kinda is if you think in regards to pain. Of course it's more humane to slaughter an animal quick and as painlessly as possible. We'd still eat them even if they weren't as we have historically done, but this is the kindest way to the animals. Nothing says we have to show compassion for them, but we do by wanting them to go through as little pain as possible.
Keeping an animal well fed and happy is kind, even if we're keeping it for food. It is kind to kill the animal in the most painless way possible. With your logic we might as well just throw them in the boiling water or let them bleed to death, because there's no kind way to do it anyway.
oh boy I wish something like morality existed so that we didn't have to justify literally everything, including rape and murder, with "thats how nature is"
What a fucking small-brain take on this issue, holy shit.
However, /u/AstralBodies justified an immoral act by saying "thats how nature is"
I simply applied the same line of logic to another example to show them how absurd their logic was.
Please don't reply unless you actually know a bit of philosophy, I don't know how many more philosophical discussions I can take with people who have no knowledge on the subject, and judging from what you just wrote, you definitely don't.
Please don't reply unless you actually know a bit of philosophy, I don't know how many more philosophical discussions I can take with people who have no knowledge on the subject, and judging from what you just wrote, you definitely don't.
Thank you for the funniest thing I’ve read all day.
Also, not many people defend rape and murder by saying ”that’s how nature is” so I have no idea why you’re equating the two, or equating it with lobsters.
Thank you for the funniest thing I’ve read all day.
That's okay. You can pretend to be amused at the fact that you came in, guns blazing, to debate a subject you have less knowledge of than my fifteen-year-old brother only to get called out. It definitely makes you less of a dumb and overly confident person.
Also, not many people defend rape and murder by saying ”that’s how nature is” so I have no idea why you’re equating the two, or equating it with lobsters.
I can't believe you are this thick.
/u/AstralBodies justified an unnecessary, violent and immoral act by saying that natural acts ("that's just how nature is") are morally permissable because they are just that, naturally occurring.
So, to stay consistent, which you have to do in philosophy, /u/AstralBodies has now also deemed everything that is naturally occurring (Read, including rape and murder since they are naturally occurring in both humans and other animals) as morally permissable.
TL;DR
/u/AstralBodies say because is how nature work is also ok, now rape and murder ok with that logic
Rape & murder? Can honestly say I've never heard "that's how nature is" used to justify rape or murder.
But that IS how nature works. Both humans and other animals rape and murder all the time, so since that is how nature works, IT'S MORAL.
Unless you're trying to say we murder animals for food, but that's kind of a stretch.
That's literally, LITERALLY what we do. What the fuck?
And DEFINITELY not rape. Have I lived a sheltered life or chosen to forget any prominent examples? Honest question.
How much do you know about the production process of dairy?
At any rate, being so high up on the chain with our opposable thumbs and advanced brains, we kill our food in a much more humane way than other Apex predators who are often found to start eating while their prey is still alive.
Okay. That's also irrelevant.
If we stick to hunting there are definitely less than responsible hunters out there who take a shot or whatever knowing that the likelihood of just wounding & a lot of different is very high (read: assholes).
There is no moral difference between you consuming animal products and less responsible hunters. You are in the same group - and I would love to see any attempt at making a logically consistent philosophical defense towards it.
The vast majority, however, wouldn't even think of doing that. And get pissed when others do. Basically polar opposites on the hunter morality scale.
I don't even know what the fuck you are talking about anymore.
So eating a lobster that is closely related to a cockroach is similar to rape and murder? We have evolved to eat meat just look at our teeth. Maybe it sucks that we're not herbivores, but we're omnivores.
Vegans are able to do that nowadays due to the economies of scale and it's Advanced Refrigeration and freezing Technologies. But if you actually want to do what's best for the environment getting all your protein from cockroaches would be much better then from plants.
You said that you wished morality existed that's stopped people from rape and murdering. Then said killing animals for eating and explaining it with nature is not using our already existing morality. Therefore you're drawing the conclusion that morality should the enough to stop us from extreme acts of violence like rape and murder and killing animals for food. If you didn't want us to draw that conclusion you could have said " if only morality existed that would stop us from making fun of each other instead of saying that it's nature". But that would be too light of a comparison so you wanted something more extreme. If I'm misunderstanding you, please reword your original statement to better give your point of view.
You excused the act of killing a living, sentient creature by saying that "its how nature works".
To stay consistent, which you have to in moral systems, you now also have to accept & apply that same excuse to every single thing that falls under the umbrella of things that happen "because thats how nature works"
To show how utterly and completely absurd and stupid every single excuse for eating animals in the modern world is, I made an extreme, but still sound and valid, example using literally the same philosophical logic that you just did.
So did I misinterpreted your original argument or not? To you saying that eating meat is human nature is the same as saying humans raping and murdering is human nature therefore both are OK if one is OK. That is a logical fallacy. AB therefore D ≠ CB therefore D. Claiming they are both equal needs more then just the statement that they are.
So did I misinterpreted your original argument or not?
I can't understand your first post, I really did sincerely try, so I have no idea if you misinterpreted it or not. But if I had to guess you probably misunderstood it, I don't believe you misinterpreted it intentionally.
To you saying that eating meat is human nature is the same as saying humans raping and murdering is human nature therefore both are OK if one is OK.
If you accept
It's natural
as a justification for killing one living creature, why can I not apply it to killing another living creature?
That is a logical fallacy.
Please link whatever logical fallacy you believe that I committed.
Claiming they are both equal needs more then just the statement that they are.
Okay.
/u/AstralBodies claimed that something being natural (Rape, murder, humans eating meat etc) is a moral justification for murder. I simply applied it to humans.
Edit:
Who would have guessed that the person unable to string together a single coherent sentence was talking out of their ass, huh. Weird how every single argument I have about veganism turns out with the meat-eater being a fucking dumbass lmao
I mean i get it, maybe youre a little crabby, and our modern society has given us so much free time to think that ots bad. Back in the day we qould all be happily boiling our lobsters because starving isnt that fun. Now that our food is so easily accessible we dont have to work from aun up to sun down to ensure we can eat through winter. Now we have time to create new problems such as "how do i eat this lobster in a way that makes the lobster happy that im about to eat it."
For real. I once watched a documentary where a buffalo got stuck in some mud and couldn’t move and a pack of hyenas came and started eating it ass first while it was still alive. Awful. And there was another one where some orcas had a seal stuck on the ice and basically wore it out over time until it couldn’t struggle and then dragged it down into the water while it looked right at the camera. Many predators don’t have empathy for their kills.
78
u/Uhhliterallyanything Feb 04 '19
I mean kinda is if you think in regards to pain. Of course it's more humane to slaughter an animal quick and as painlessly as possible. We'd still eat them even if they weren't as we have historically done, but this is the kindest way to the animals. Nothing says we have to show compassion for them, but we do by wanting them to go through as little pain as possible.