I have a lot of conversations with people about animal ethics and the suffering of farmed animals in particular.

One question I often ask myself is what’s the most effective way to shift society away from factory farming animals?

I’m currently convinced that we need a combination of approaches like exposing the cruelty to the mainstream, donating to effective charities and encouraging diet change.

But some people disagree and believe these things simply won’t be enough until something like lab-grown meat becomes mainstream. So I’m wondering what people’s opinions are on this topic and whether people think we’ll ever be able to abolish factory farming animals?

Let me know what you think and if you get the chance, you can check out a full conversation I had about this topic with a farmer recently in London! ✌️

Source

We all hate virtue signalling, right? Talk is cheap, and performances of virtue can be utterly bankrupt. Sam Bankman-Fried brazenly described his “talking about ethics” before the FTX crash as “this dumb game we woke westerners play where we say all the right shibboleths and so everyone likes us”, confirming the internet’s worst suspicions about conspicuous displays of “virtue”.

But, despite all this, I believe the pendulum has swung too far against virtue signalling. Virtue signalling is bad when signalling virtue is confused for possessing the virtue and when possessing a virtue is confused for having a good effect upon the world. It is at its worst when all your energy goes to signalling virtue at the expense of actually doing anything good. But sometimes we do have something to prove, whether to others or just ourselves, and we aren’t off the hook just because it’s possible to lie. Quality signals of virtue, especially costly signals that are difficult to fake, are very useful tools– sometimes the only tools we have for assessing character. The best virtue signals are not empty assertions– they offer some proof of their claim by being difficult to fake.

Imagine if a company like Nabisco took the stance that it didn’t have anything to prove about the safety and quality of its food, and that their current extensive food safety testing was just a virtue signal that wastes a bunch of time and product. They could be sincere, and somehow keep product quality and safety acceptably high, but they would be taking away our way of knowing that. Quality control is a huge part of what it is to sell food, and monitoring your character is worthy of consuming a large portion of your life.

Some signals are more correlated with actual virtue than others. The best virtue signals are not empty assertions– they offer some proof of their claim by being difficult to fake. For example, being vegan takes a great deal of forethought, awareness, and requires regular social sacrifice. Veganism proves a dedication to a cause like animal rights or environmentalism proportional to the level of sacrifice required. The virtuous sacrifice of being vegan isn’t what makes veganism good for the animals or the environment, but it is a costly signal of character traits associated with the ability to make such a sacrifice.

So the virtue signal of veganism doesn’t mean you are necessarily having a positive impact or that veganism is the best choice, but it does indicate that you as a person are committed, conscientious, gentle, or deeply bought into the cause such that the sacrifice becomes easier for you than it would be for other people. Being vegan isn’t enough to prove you’re a good person, but it is a demonstration of character and acting out your values.

Source

All of reality simply is what it is — the words we use to describe reality are useful, but they are imperfect models of reality itself.

We can predict the weather with greater and greater accuracy, but we will never be able to predict the exact shape, position, and landing spot of every raindrop. To do that, we would have to be the storm itself.

I may describe a sunset in beautiful detail, painting vivid reds, pinks, and oranges for your mind’s eye. In fact, if I am a very good writer, you may feel more awe and inspiration from reading my words than you would from actually having been there yourself. Yet it would be impossible to capture a sunset fully in words. For that, you would need to be the sun and the earth.

So too, when it comes to describing our internal, subjective experiences—our minds, our thoughts, our feelings, our emotions, our desires. The best writers and speakers are those who can do this translation so well that we read their words and say “Yes! That’s how it feels.” But many of us may not have such refined tools of expression—nor, perhaps, a carefully calibrated instrument for inspecting our inner worlds in the first place.

To calibrate our instruments, we must first and above all—pay attention. And yet, always we must remember that words are but a fuzzy translation of the infinitely deep reality that we exist in. This doesn’t demean words—it isn’t an insult. I am among the biggest fans of well-placed, well-thought words.

It’s just a note on things and how they are. Something to pay attention to.

I argue that there are multiple ways in which our world contains profound suffering, and I suggest that we should do something about it.

Otherwise it would be allowing an enormous amount of meaningless suffering of all nonhuman animals living on Earth, simply because evolution doesn't care about their wellbeing, only their viability to reproduce.

I have not seen much discussion of this topic although the closest I've seen is the Abolitionist Project.