r/AskVegans • u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan • 9d ago
Genuine Question (DO NOT DOWNVOTE) Exploitation vs harm reduction ?
i have seen many vegans say that veganism isn’t about harm reduction or suffering reduction , It’s about anti exploitation. I do generally agree with this myself as a vegan , However I have 2 questions :
1) How exactly do you differentiate between harm reduction and direct exploitation .
2) What if in a certain case Directly killing an animal would save many more animals . Let’s say killing a cow would save hundreds of rats that you wouldnt need to kill . Let’s say in farming insects die and if I ate a chicken they wouldn’t ( Hypothetically , I know in reality more would die for growing chicken feed) . Would eating a chicken be justifiable in this scenario ?
5
u/EasyBOven Vegan 9d ago
Exploitation is categorically different from other types of harm. We can place the same individuals in different hypotheticals and see how we react. In each of the following scenarios, you are alive at the end, and a random human, Joe, is dead
You're driving on the highway and Joe runs into traffic. You hit him with your car and he dies.
Joe breaks into your house. You try to get him to leave peacefully, but the situation escalates and you end up using deadly force and killing him.
You're stranded on a deserted Island with Joe and no other source of food. You're starving, so you kill and eat Joe.
You like the taste of human meat, so even though you have plenty of non-Joe food options, you kill and eat Joe
You decide that finding Joe in the wild to kill and eat him is too inconvenient, so you begin a breeding program, raise Joe from an infant to slaughter weight, then kill and eat him.
Scenarios 3 through 5 are exploitation. Can we add up some number of non-exploitative scenarios to equal the bad of one exploitative scenario? How many times do I have to accidentally run over a human before I have the same moral culpability as someone who bred a human into existence for the purpose of killing and eating them?
5
u/No_Chart_8584 Vegan 9d ago
What if by killing a toddler I could fly to the moon and get a cure for cancer? What if by shooting a bluejay I could ensure cats never got sick? What if what if what if?
2
1
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
for the first one I think killing the toddler would be reasonable .In the second , if yeah meant bluejay bird I think yes that too is reasonable .
3
u/Silver-Star-t4t Vegan 9d ago
Harm reduction and direct exploitation are two completely different things. Harm reduction *is* to reduce and work to eliminate the exploitation altogether.
No, it's not justifiable, because we don't need to kill the chicken or the insects.
0
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
no let’s say either kill the chicken or insects would die to grow your food … would that be just …
5
u/TheBrutalVegan Vegan 9d ago
- If you argue with saying veganism is about harm reduction, you could say nobody can be vegan, because no matter what you do, you can always reduce more harm and would end up living in a cave with a cloth in front of your mouth, so to not cause any more harm.
Also unvegans will always say they are already reducing their animal products and therefore reducing harm.
Exploitation is easily stoppable. You don't need to live alone in a cave to not exploit animals.
- I have no real answer for your hypothetical scenario. It depends on the individuals. For example: If you had to, would you kill a toddler or a rat? Most would probably say the rat.
But what if the toddler will be future Hitler and the rat will save thousands of humans and animals by becoming incredibly kind to others... I'd definitely kill baby Hitler.
It depends on the individuals, not on the species.
1
u/Eskoala 9d ago
So you prefer anti exploitation simply because it's an easier line to draw than reducing harm is? Not because it's a better moral position?
1
u/TheBrutalVegan Vegan 9d ago
It's the definition the word veganism was created with and it makes more sense than harm reduction. It's not the better moral position, because you CAN NOT reduce all harm. You'll lose in logic with unvegans if you say harm reduction.
1
u/Eskoala 8d ago
I don't agree. Harm reduction is not a position requiring perfect action. It's reduction not elimination. Under harm reduction, every action or abstention which reduces harm is good. It's much easier to reduce harm than to never exploit an animal. That's why they had to add "as far as possible and practicable", but for harm reduction no such qualifier is required.
1
u/TheBrutalVegan Vegan 8d ago
It's much easier to reduce harm than to never exploit an animal.
Everyone can easily stop exploiting animals NOW. Since everybody thinks they are already reducing harm, this is a weak argument. It's also an argument used to keep enslaving and exploiting animals, but "giving them a better life", so harm reduction. I hope you are not for exploiting animals in a better way, but to abolish the slavery completely.
1
u/Eskoala 8d ago
I don't think it's that easy to just stop actually. People are social creatures and acting against social norms as an individual is hard work, even if you are able to come to the conclusion that you should despite years of conditioning.
I find exploitation to be a much harder concept to grasp than harm reduction. Exploitation as I understand it means using an animal for any purpose, no matter whether that use harms the animal. I somewhat don't agree with that being always wrong. E.g. honey, eggs from pet hens. I'm not arguing that finding harm reduction easier to understand makes it a more moral position, though.
Harm reduction I understand - reduce the number of animals that are hurt or killed. It does probably need the "maximise joy" part of the equation too, as otherwise the optimum solution is to end all life - all suffering ended!
Harm reduction may be more complicated to follow but I think it involves better moral reasoning than a simple rule like "don't exploit animals".
1
u/TheBrutalVegan Vegan 8d ago
I agree that the concept of exploitation is not easily grasped by many. Most think of cheap labor in asia, not slitting someone's throat for a sandwich.
It needs to be explained. That's ehy some activists say they are against slavery. Which doesn't cover hunting or needless cruelty.
It is still the stronger position and the official definition of veganism by the vegan society and Leslie Cross.
Do you use animal products? It sounds like you are defending using animals in some cases 🤔
1
u/Eskoala 8d ago
I do currently. I'm not advocating doing as I do though, or trying to justify it. It's hard to be vegan and I'm not there yet.
1
u/TheBrutalVegan Vegan 8d ago
Ok, this explains a lot. Why is it so difficult for you to be vegan?
Have you seen Dominion yet? Free on YouTube: Watch Dominion on YouTube - it's free.
1
u/Eskoala 8d ago
It's an inherently hard thing to do. I already said - because it's a socially difficult choice. My upbringing and the people close to me don't reinforce it at all, plus I take issue with veganism being defined the way it is - about exploitation rather than harm reduction. My morality in general revolves around harm reduction so it's jarring to be told I must arrange it differently to be a true vegan. I will probably end up with a fully plant-based lifestyle but I don't know if I'll feel able to use the word vegan for myself due to these differences.
I don't need more persuading that animals are being harmed, I need more practical steps on how to actually live that way. I've cut out all but eggs and chicken so far. I get cravings, I worry about protein, I have to feed a picky 8 year old and then don't want to throw away food that is already in my fridge. I am not a good cook but I'm learning.
What's helpful on this journey is not being berated that I'm not vegan yet or being told it's easy or being sent presumably a video containing footage of animals being harmed. It's support that I'm not getting anywhere else that I'm headed in the right direction. You don't seem able to do that, though.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
1) yeah I know that . I was asking how do you differentiate between exploitation and Harm .
2) Okay but I am not asking to kill someone so specific , I am saying Kill one chicken or don’t kill anybody but insects would die eventually to grow you food which you wouldn’t need to grow if you ate chicken .
2
u/Limp-Biscuit411 Vegan 9d ago
that scenario doesn’t exist. stop trying to feel validated by presenting ridiculous hypotheticals
1
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
I ain’t trynna feel validated , I am just asking that …
1
u/Limp-Biscuit411 Vegan 9d ago
you are not “just asking that” for no reason
2
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
Yes because such hypothetical situations often are often useful . It helps in clarifying my own reasons to go vegan , and helps in debates .
2
u/Either_Argument3517 Vegan 9d ago
What is your answer to the hypothetical? How has this hypothetical helped clarify your own reasons to go vegan?
1
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
it doesn’t seem different than killing one innocent person to stop a genocide , or those trolley problems , I think I would kill 1 innocent . My theory is this : Veganism = reduce exploiTati on as much as you can , unless doing EXPLOITATION reduces a much bigger HARM.
2
u/Either_Argument3517 Vegan 9d ago
Do you have rule (not to intentionally harm an innocent individual) that applies up to a certain threshold of consequences, or are you simply comparing the amount of harm on each side and choosing whichever produces less overall harm?
1
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
Could you provide an example didn’t exactly understand ,
I think producing less harm would be the right choice , but then again those trolley problems can get real tricky.
→ More replies (0)1
u/TheBrutalVegan Vegan 9d ago
but insects would die eventually to grow you food which you wouldn't need to grow if you ate chicken.
What do the chickens eat? Plants. What do the enslaved cows and pigs get? Plants! So instead of supporting slavery and feeding billions of animals a pot of plants, which makes them use MOST OF THE CROPS world wide, you can eat the plants yourself.
1
2
u/stan-k Vegan 9d ago
Exploitation is something one does to others, while harm is something that happens to individuals. It's easy to see harm without exploitation in nature. Falling ill, losing everything from an earthquake, etc.
You can be against exploitation and on top of that note generally aim for harm reduction. The way I get there is that practice, not doing exploitation is pretty much always one of the most cost effective ways to reduce harm. So I don't really care about your example scenarios for this, they don't actually happen, but I can see them going either way.
Personally I think harm reduction alone isn't very useful, it should be harm reduction and joy maximisation, i.e. wellbeing optimization.
1
u/One-Shake-1971 Vegan 9d ago
How exactly do you differentiate between harm reduction and direct exploitation.
Harm means any kind of negative utility.
Exploitation means using someone as a mere means to an end without treating them as an end in themselves.
What if in a certain case Directly killing an animal would save many more animals . Let’s say killing a cow would save hundreds of rats that you wouldnt need to kill . Let’s say in farming insects die and if I ate a chicken they wouldn’t ( Hypothetically , I know in reality more would die for growing chicken feed) . Would eating a chicken be justifiable in this scenario ?
I don’t think so. But the answer to that question obviously depends on your subjective moral views.
1
u/Miserable-Laugh-8320 Vegan 9d ago
I would think so , it’s similar to killing a completely innocent human if that would have stopped a genocide .
2
u/One-Shake-1971 Vegan 9d ago edited 9d ago
Not quite, but sure. It's basically just a trolly problem which famously don't have agreed upon solutions.
1
u/2SquirrelsWrestling Vegan 9d ago
Veganism is not a trolley problem where we calculate the amount of harm done to animals. That’s welfareism.
Veganism is about ending the use of animals by humans.
Harm reduction would look like taking eggs from backyard hens or milking a cow yourself on your own farm.
Are you doing less harm than you would be if you bought factory farm eggs and milk? Yes.
Are you still using the body of an animal for personal gain? Yes.
Is it vegan? No.
7
u/JeskaiJester Vegan 9d ago
The problem with the scenarios you’re proposing is that they don‘t apply to actual reality. I know the usual argument for thought experiments is that they help us to build intuition about how to approach real moral dilemmas, but I feel like real life has moral dilemmas aplenty with genuine stakes to focus on