Can you make a sound, MORAL/ETHICAL argument for NOT being Vegan?
Even if you think you would or could never be a vegan...can you make an ethical argument against the idea that anyone who has the means to be vegan SHOULD be vegan?
very fiew people can deal with the cognitive dissonance of knowing that what they do is not right and still do it. they generally just desperatly look for arguments that support what they are presently doing. most people will only admit that veganism is the more moral choice once they become vegan. I am one of the rare people that can say that I eat meat and I am aware it would be more moral to not eat meat as I am aware that it is cruel and unnecessary to enslave and kill animals just to eat them. I am also aware that for the environment it would be better if humanity was vegan and there would be more food to go around so possibly less starving people. but i still eat meat. one day I will have to grow out of this bad habit and change my ways if I want to feel more peace within myself.
Yes. My mother who made me sit at the table for hours, if necessary, to make me eat my vegetables that I hated, and even if I gagged, I still had to eat them. Good enough fer ya? Was for me. I hate vegetables to this day and I vowed as a teenager that when I got out of that house I would never eat another vegetable. Once in awhile I do put very rarely. I'm trying to incorporate them into my cooking now and it's not going too bad but I'll never eat peas, buddy, I tell you that. 😂 And NO LIVER!!! 🤭😂🤯🙃😄
Don't get me wrong. I know that plants are impressive organisms in their own right and have been evolving away for millions of years and posses many interesting adaptations, chemical communications and symbiotic relationships. They're not stones sitting in the dirt unresponsively. But they are thoughtless, they're not sentient and they're not rational. Sentience requires consciousness and rationality requires reason. Two things that just aren't happening in an organism with no mechanism to process thought. What they do is react and they do it very well. We're learning more about how sophisticated some of these adaptations can be...but at the end of the day what you're doing here is attempting anthropomorphize what is fundamentally non-sentient reaction to stimulus. A plant is not rational because its roots follow the path of least resistance until they find water. A plant is not thoughtful because upon encountering a chemical it undergoes a physiological change which has proven to be adaptive.
All this to say, just because a plant interacts mechanically with the world around it does not mean it possesses the qualities necessary to experience suffering. And i think plant life is indeed worth respecting. Not everyone does but i do and in the same way i try not to kill insects needlessly i avoid killing or damaging plants where it's not necessary. Nothing wrong with respecting a life...but that's not what we're discussing just now.
So i don't think you really answered my question: In what sense would you suggest a plant is capable of suffering? You've pointed out that plants are impressively reactive but i'm not convinced you've made any argument toward them having the ability to experience and if they can't do that then i don't they can be said to be suffering.
@Pikachu well, I guess we literally have just about covered everything. If the cases proposed have been denied by you, we can do nothing but go eternally back and forth and I'm not sure what else for plants can convince you that they can suffer at this point
I love those Highland cows. I guess you could argue that being vegan is not an ethical issue. Homo Sapiens are omnivorous and since we cannot photosynthesize for our energy, we must consume living things like plants and animals.
@Pikachu Well I am against the way we raise our animals for sure. Every farmer is different though. I live in a semi-rural area where I can observe some farming practices. Some cows are in the fields munching on grass while other farmers keep them in a muddy pen. Pigs are usually raised very poorly. I get all my eggs straight from a free range farm.
There are definitely better and worse ways to source animal products and i don't want to suggest that your choices in that area are not good ones. But at the end of the day the problem remains that we're taking life where we need not take it.
Yes I tried being vegetarian and began to suffer dizzy fits. When I started eating meat again they stopped. That told me that my body was lacking nutrients it desperately needed that it could only get from eating meat. This was enough reason for me to stay a meat eater.
@Pikachu I have I do eat vegetarian food just not every day. Also it is a common thing for vegetarians/ vegans to eat soya I can't have it because it's a known trigger for bladder pain syndrome which I have.
Hey, you don't have to justify to me any health issues you have. Veganism just means you seek to reduce suffering wherever possible which it sounds like you are attempting to do by eating vegetarian at least some of the time.
I agree that only with practical options can anyone move toward veganism. As for killing rats, i guess that falls under the net reduction in harm. If you need to kill rats in order to protect your crop then that's what you have to do, practically speaking. In the same way that you're justified in protecting your sheep by shooting a wolf that is preying upon them.
@Pikachu Agreed. Thing is, going vegan is fine and it will benefit the planet however there are many crops that aren’t water friendly or encourage deforestation. I think it would have to be very carefully implemented. That’s going to take a lot of time.
Nope. When pushing to make everyone vegan, it's important to note that it simply isn't possible for everyone, whether it is due to physical issues or budgetary restrictions. But that's just for that movement. You already limited the question to those who have the means. Then the only argument against it may be taste preference, which I would consider fair, but I can't think of any ethical argument to encourage people to eat meat against their preference.
Then the only argument against it may be taste preference, which I would consider fair
How is it a fair and ethical argument that you prefer the taste of animal flesh to not torturing animals? Can you elaborate?
but I can't think of any ethical argument to encourage people to eat meat against their preference.
Isn't making it clear that liking the way an animal's body tastes is not a morally sound reason to cause suffering a good encouragement? Isn't showing baby chicks being fed into a grinder or pigs thrashing around in a gas chamber representative of an ethical argument which can encourage people that their preference for the taste of flesh is not a morally defensible reason to keep eating animals? I'm not saying that will work in all or even most cases but it certainly seems to be a viable avenue of argumentation .
@Pikachu the taste preference is in my opinion a fair argument against veganism (or more accurately: for omnivorism) because we don't only eat to survive, but also to bring pleasure into our life. I didn't say that was an ethical argument and don't think it is.
The way meat is produced is certainly an ethical argument against eating meat, but that wasn't your question. You asked about ethical arguments against avoiding meat and I can't think of any in that category.
Only decaying, decadent civilizations worry about not causing unnecessary suffering? I disagree. Enlightened civilizations care about not causing unnecessary suffering.
Well i don't think it's a question of "if" you have a reason to. Whether or not you have the desire there's a good ethical reason not to consume animal products. But indeed, it is the purpose of this thread to explore that idea.
