Gosh, look at that

Community
#61

One of the funny things about ethics is it comes back to what the majority of society feel is acceptable defines ethical. The interesting thing is that while society used to be “the people who lived in the same cave as you” but the group has grown to “villages”, then “countries” and now, to a certain extent, the species.

So, I’ll answer your question as follows:

I feel it is unethical to eat humans, but ethical to eat animals. But I believe that the animals shouldn’t be put through undue hardship and suffering while they are being farmed.

#62

One of the things I am picking up here is that, there are some people in this discussion who are fundamentally opposed to omnivorous diet in humans.

One of the problems of fundamentalism is that it usually seeks to limit the rights of the majority based on the beliefs of what is often a vocal minority. For example, I could argue the following: “religion has been the purported cause of many and bloody wars and atrocities. Therefore the world should recognise that religion is a dangerous and divisive influence in the world and should be banned. I think I’ll lobby my government…” That would make me a fundamental athesist.
This is essentially the same argument I see being made here by the fundamental vegetarians (as opposed to the moderate veggies).

What would really be the best thing for the planet is if there were just fewer darn people! Unfortunately, the developed world operates on ridiculous economic models of based on infinite growth, so declining birth-rates, for example are (I believe erroneously) seen to be a Bad Thing (quick, abolish feminism to avoid economic chaos).

I have also seen some spurious arguments about farming practice.
1/ If you don’t take good care of your animals, they will not produce well.
2/ If you don’t milk your cows every day they stop lactating until they have another calf – when I was a child we used to “dry-off” a portion of the herd over winter. As I understand it, you can do this with pretty much any mammal (yes, even humans).
3/ modern cattle do have horns and can defend themselves even without them – we usually de-horn cattle to prevent unnecessary injury to them and us.
4/ some animals are bred for intelligence – e.g. dogs and horses. A stupid dog is useless.

Edit: to clarify, there is a difference between a fundamentalist group trying to make their way the only way, and a minority trying to protect its right to exist. The difference would be for example, vegeterians trying to make meat consumption illegal; versus vegeterians trying to raise awareness to their point of view and increase the availability of meat-free alternatives.

#63

Why?

Do you have a reason based on differences between humans and other animals that makes it okay to eat one and not the other?

Or does your preamble essentially mean “this is what I have been enculturated to believe, and that’s all there is to ethics”?

I’d like to think that we can reason these things through. While it’s tricky to pin down why one action okay and another isn’t because the foundations of ethical stances are somewhat arbitrary, we can at least try to be consistent within a stance. If we’re going to be consistent about our ethics regarding eating animals, we need to identify the difference between humans and other animals that makes it okay for us to eat one and not the other. The creationists have have an easy out, they can say that God said it was okay to eat other animals but not people. The rest of us have to work from our own first principals to reach a rationale.

I can no longer see the difference between humans and other animals that makes it okay to eat other animals but not to eat people. Many animals appear to have emotions, intelligence (to varying degrees), and a will to live. I like a lot of animals more than I like a lot of people, and feel more sympathy for them than for a lot of people. A lot of people are, frankly, abhorrent.

#64

You’d have as much luck researching this as me. I don’t have iron issues, so it’s not something I’ve looked into.

EDIT: in the past in similar discussions I’ve seen vegetarians point people to good resources on these issues. So I know there is good advice out there, I just don’t know where it is.

#65

I would like to see the majority opinion change, as it did with slavery and tobacco.

But the process of forcing change doesn’t appeal to me, because authoritarian rule doesn’t appeal. Look at how the communist governments of China and Russia enforced athiesm - by killing opposition out of existence. Doing that with meat-eating would be trading one unappealing thing for another even more unappealing thing.

EDIT: Likewise, look at all the good that illegalising marijuana in NZ does. Sweet fuck all - it just makes people deal with criminals to get weed, and makes growing and selling it a profitable criminal enterprise. And for what? To stop the public getting hold of a drug that is less damaging than another drug that is not only acceptable but totally lauded in most of our society: alcohol.

There is a parallel there. What’s the difference between having marijuana and alcohol? Not much. Between eating people and other animals? Not much. Because the differences between humans and animals are not so great as we like to think.

So I’d like to see people be genuinely convinced of a new position, using good information and reasoning. That happens all the time: see slavery and tobacco and hundreds of other social changes that have occurred in our societies. However, I don’t make any claim to be able to see the future. Anything could happen, and the world trends at present are apparently towards more meat-eating not less (again, according to that UN report).

#66

I don’t have problems with iron either - or at least, I’ve figured out a diet that seems to do the trick on that front.

I had a friend that, when first trying vegetarianism, had trouble with iron (she has a crackup story about going into a cafe on doctor’s advice and getting the meatiest dish possible… with extra meat). She must have found a way because she’s vegan now and in tip-top health.

Here’s some advice:
vrg.org/nutrition/iron.htm

[quote]Summary

Dried beans and dark green leafy vegetables are especially good sources of iron, even better on a per calorie basis than meat. Iron absorption is increased markedly by eating foods containing vitamin C along with foods containing iron. Vegetarians do not have a higher incidence of iron deficiency than do meat eaters.[/quote]

#67

That’s not the case here at all. We are moderate vegetarians :wink:

I don’t think that’s really true. You’re closer to the demons in your next sentence -

Bingo - it’s not us, it’s our systems. We can sustain human life, but we can’t sustain our systems. So we need system change. Like a massive shift to vegetarianism. :wink:

Telpe, I fear that your view is that animals are a nothing more than a unit of production. Like you say “a stupid dog is useless” but I don’t think being “useful to humans” is really something an animal should have to worry about.

To offer an alternative to the “eating humans” line, consider farming and eating cats and dogs. The domestic types you find in suburban houses. Most people have a strong objection to eating dogs. But are they much different to sheep?

The answer is no, and the reason is, again, because we have a culture of not eating them. Well, what if we had a culture of respecting all animals in the same way we do cats and dogs? It’s not much of a stretch, even for a fundamentalist meat eater :wink:

#68

Ta-ness

#69

Or to put your question in a different way - is it OK to hunt humans in the wild ? We have a word for that: murder.

Coming back to your question, I think it is possible to imagine a situation where it is acceptable to consume human flesh. When we were attending antenatal classes in London (10 years ago !), we heard stories of what people did with the placenta. And some people fry it and eat it (apparently it goes well with onions). Is that OK ? Well, yuck, but I can’t see the harm in it.

If we take it further, then could we imagine a situation where it is OK to butcher and eat a full human body. What if someone had a will that said “If I die in a car crash, I leave my body to the Cannibal Association of New Zealand”. If it’s OK to leave your body to science, is it OK to leave it to a fringe group of foodies ? I suspect that this may be OK on a purely ethical level.

Now let’s look at farming humans for consumption. I don’t like this at all. I don’t think humans should be able to own other humans, nor harm them against their will.

It all comes down to consent, and whether humans should gain consent from an animal before exploiting it in some way. I’m under no illusion: there would be few, if any, animals that would offer themselves up for slaughter a la Milliways.

So why can humans do this ? Because we feel we are different to animals. However you cut it, that’s what it comes down to. Instinct vs reason, abstract learning vs concrete learning, level of intelligence, whatever - we can come up with ways to support this assertion.

At which point, we can descry a taxonomy and assign some animals to the Don’t Eat category, according to our cultural values.

And now I will ask a question of you:

You are a consumer of leather. What makes it OK to use the hide of an animal, and not that of a human and should we farm humans for their hides ?

#70

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]It all comes down to consent, and whether humans should gain consent from an animal before exploiting it in some way. I’m under no illusion: there would be few, if any, animals that would offer themselves up for slaughter a la Milliways.

So why can humans do this ? Because we feel we are different to animals. However you cut it, that’s what it comes down to.[ Instinct vs reason, abstract learning vs concrete learning, level of intelligence, whatever - we can come up with ways to support this assertion.[/quote]

I agree, this is what it actually all comes down to. Are other animals worthy of our respect in not enslaving and/or eating them?

As I see it, the differences between us and other animals are just a matter of degree. Every time we try to come up with “what makes us different” someone finds an animal that does it too, although typically to a lesser degree. Language, tool use, etc.

Some adult animals (e.g. pigs) are smarter than human infants. If it’s okay to eat pigs because they’re not as smart as humans adults, is it okay to eat human babies for the same reason?

If we progressively bred pigs for more intelligence and communication, at what point on their way to human intelligence would it stop being okay to eat them? When they understand what’s going to happen and learn how to ask us not to?

If mental capacities are the reason that it’s okay to eat some animals and not others, shouldn’t we try to assay those capacities in a range of animals and decide which are okay to eat? Where would we draw the line - should chimps, which are capable of learning sign language and expressing themselves, be considered valid food if they’re not endangered? If not, how much thicker than a chimp does an animal have to be before it’s okay to eat it?

I don’t believe it is OK to farm or hunt animals for their hides. I just don’t have the energy to resist it in a world where it’s the norm. I’m prepared to admit that my beliefs and my actions don’t line up here, as I did earlier in this thread. I try to use non-animal products where possible, but it’s an uphill battle. Animal products get in everywhere. The drive for non-animal-based technological innovation in the modern world is tiny compared to the innovation of the livestock-based industries. I would like to pursue more non-animal-based products to help support that industry.

By comparison to stopping using all animal products in the modern world, stopping eating meat is simple. Except where tiny amounts of animal get into things like wine, cheese, miso soup, etc. In those tricky instances I tend to not worry about complete vegetarianism either. Likewise if I buy something thinking it’s vegetaran and then discover it’s not while eating it. I won’t finish it unless the amount of meat is tiny (bacon bits on bread or something), but I don’t get upset about it. I’m working the percentages - trying to reduce my use of animal products as much as possible without driving myself crazy being really strict about it in a world where bits of animal (and animal cruelty) get in everywhere and many animal products like leather are far more available than non-animal-based alternatives. Ever tried looking for shoes and belts with no leather? They exist, but you have to hunt them down and range is limited.

I have a lot of admiration for the vegans who go all the way and really research and search out non-animal products.

#71

[quote=“Exquire”]
To offer an alternative to the “eating humans” line, consider farming and eating cats and dogs. The domestic types you find in suburban houses. Most people have a strong objection to eating dogs. But are they much different to sheep?

The answer is no, and the reason is, again, because we have a culture of not eating them. Well, what if we had a culture of respecting all animals in the same way we do cats and dogs? It’s not much of a stretch, even for a fundamentalist meat eater :wink:[/quote]

Actually, I don’t have any objections to people eating these animals if they want to, however I have read that carnivores tend to taste more rank than herbivores. Thus if you are stuck on a mountain-top somewhere and starving to death, the vegeterians should taste better than the omnivores. :slight_smile: Although, it is usually of who dies first from injuries etc in these cases, I understand.

Some people make pets of what are more widely regarded as ‘edible’ animals too - like sheep. Some people eat horses, others find that disgusting. In some cultures it is not acceptable to eat eggs on the grounds that it is immoral to eat anything which has not had a chance to be born. :open_mouth:

I stick by my assertion that we are evolved to be omnivires - yes, but and large we cook our meat, but not always. I think this is more a social convention. I have my steak blue - when I cook it at home the middle is warmed but raw; it is delicious (I trust that the hygene standard in our meat processing is sufficent that I won’t get a tape work from this). I also like sashmi. There are other expamles of where people commonly eat uncooked meat.

The alternatives to meat don’t really bear thinking about. With much effort red lentils can be coaxed into edibility, but nuts and seeds come associated with horrifically high energy content and dried beans are just plain revolting no matter what you do to them. :cry:

I could be glib and say it is ok for me to eat anything that is dumber that I am, but it is a little more complex than that (and I would not want to get arrested…).

#72

Hardly convincing.

On the one hand, you have managed to identify some delicacies (typically enjoyed by only the ruling classes) that involve minimal/no cooking. Do you seriously expect me to believe that this is proof of evolution ?

On the other hand is entire cultures who embrace vegetarianism…

#73

What if an animal dies of accidental causes (e.g. roadkill), is it disrespectful to eat that animal in this situation ? Is it disrespectful to eat plants or to deny plants a natural life by micromanaging their lifecycle ?

You’re missing the point. It’s not about devising an algorithm and assigning values based on some human-centric evaluation system.

It’s about affinity, which is necessarily cultural and therefore intrisically fuzzy. Which is why I would never eat a primate, but other cultures would.

I’m not suggesting some kind of blank cheque on account of cultural relativism. Spreading affinity is how we change attitudes towards animals. This is why the Save the Whales campaign was so successful. The public gained affinity with aquatic mammalian megafauna after a hard fought campaign by Greenpeace and others.

So, the challenge to the pro-vegetarian lobby is to spread affinity with all animals. Which means the question for us meat-eaters is: Is my affinity with this animal outweighed by how good it tastes to eat ? For me, with regard to certain animals, the answer is “yes”.

Given the prevelance of leather alternatives (vinyl etc), perhaps you asked yourself the question: Is my affinity with this animal outweighed by how useful and authentic-looking it’s hide is ?. And perhaps you answered “yes”.

Although I do agree with your general thrust that a step in the right direction is useful, even if you can’t go the whole way. It’s like saving the planet, incrementalism works.

#74

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]
On the one hand, you have managed to identify some delicacies (typically enjoyed by only the ruling classes) that involve minimal/no cooking. Do you seriously expect me to believe that this is proof of evolution ? [/quote]

No, as evidence if evolution, I expect you to look at the physical structure of the human body:
1/ binocular vision (both eyes point in the same direction) required for estimating distances. Found in predators. Herbivores tend to have their eyes spaced so that they do not have the overlap needed for accurate distance estimation, but have an overall larger field of view sensitive mostly to motion, good for avoiding predators.
2/ canine teeth. for tearing flesh. not good for grinding grains like molars are.
3/ underdeveloped appendix and caecum - unlike rabbits and other herbivores which have large appendix and caecum for breaking down cellulose.

We are biologically omnivores. Some of us are also prefferentially omnivores. :smiley:

EDIT: edited for ty#pos

#75

You know, I read an interesting article once, can’t remember where it was. It was about the roman gladiators being vegetarian. They studied their bones or something. It was interesting.

#76

Ha hA
This was about vego gladiators!
Its funny watching people get so wound up about guff on here though.
I however, with my biology degree which included some anatomy and physiology study feel under equipped to deal with the socio-cultural discourse on ethics of eating meat! So i won’t! :unamused:

As for the weak attempt at humour, the vego vs meaters larp, there will be no advantages for either side. I mean get with the program this would be FULL IMMERSION! No phys repping allowed for diet. Vego’s will form one side, meaters and/or omni’s on the other. :smiling_imp:

Jared

#77

As Sergant Major Dorsai Rollins once said on vegeterian cooking’
“First catch your vegetarian”

#78

Actually, I was wondering about something, Ryan, what do you feed your cat? I read somewhere that cats need taurine which they can only get from meat, but is there a way to finagle around that?

#79

We feed her biscuits with fish in’em. I’ve heard there are vegan cat biscuits, it’s on my list of inconvenient things to investigate. There’s a vegan shop on K Rd that I keep meaning to check out.

I do have an “almost thick enough to not worry about eating” list, and fish are up the top there with members of the pro-gun lobby and people who smoke cigarettes. Mmm… smokey flavoured.

Anyone want to ask if I kill insects in my house? That usually comes straight after what do you feed your pet questions. For that matter, is it okay to keep pets as, essentially, slave species?

#80

[quote=“Alista”]As Sergant Major Dorsai Rollins once said on vegeterian cooking’
“First catch your vegetarian”[/quote]

Thank you sergeant “Fragger” peters. :smiling_imp: