/lit/ - Literature

Animals do not have souls and are here to serve man.

>>19146523
Just consume vegan literature. It's your best bet, but even that's kind of a cope at the end of the day. Supplying enough people with only vegetables will decimate entire swaths of land where billions of animals live.

Either that or consuming bugs or animals without nervous systems. It's probably enough for you, but not feasible at scale for the entire population.

It's just a way of trying to feel less guilty about being selfish, but you will always be selfish. Life is selfish. Bringing more humans into a world that already has 7 billion just because you need YOUR family name to continue is selfish. Having a whole house to yourself when you could be sheltering more people is selfish. Wearing expensive clothes and making posts on a fancy computer instead of simplifying your life is selfish.

You just gotta choose where to draw the line and move on. I still eat meat because I like it. That's the basic gist of it.

>>19146523
Brian Tomasik’s Essays on Reducing Suffering are worth reading.

https://reducing-suffering.org/

>>19146523
Just don't eat any mammals: you are human anon, you've gotta stay healthy.
also, IIRC >>19146539

All romance novels are written at the level of consciousness experienced by women and other animals.

>>19146539
Jesus is a trick on niggers

>>19146722
Thats fair, I feel bad for cows and pigs man fuck chickens they are dumb as hell. Got no problem eating a chicken.

>>19146582
why should i reduce suffering

>reduce the amount of suffering in the world
Negative utilitarianism is a rabbit hole that will eventually lead you to schizo shit like antinatalism. Just try to find humanely raised meat and avoid preprocessed meat and poultry products, if factory farming truly bothers you.

https://www.booktopia.com.au/on-eating-meat-matthew-evans/book/9781760637699.html

Myself, I believe that animals aren't sentient and that humans are faculative carnivores. Therefore we function best on a mostly or exclusively meat diet. I did not choose to be born so it isn't my fault that I must eat this way. I will not bring more children into the world so I will not perpetuate it.

dont have any evidence but im pretty sure cats and dogs have minds similar to humans at 3 years old and dolphins probably as 9 or 10 years old humans

>>19146523
Yeah sometimes this fucks me up. I try to only eat eggs and fish since chickens and fish are too dumb for it to matter, but I’m also addicted to dairy products even though that’s basically the worst in terms of animal cruelty.
From living with a vegan for a while, aside from Michael Pollan the books are all bad and have the same content as the random movies that circulate every few years. Fish are basically sea insects, chicken are basically infant/fetus tier, but cows/pigs/goats/etc are more or less the same as small children which is unfortunate.

my theory is that all animals we think are intelligent are actually dumb. monkeys, dolphins etc. are in my opinion the most retard brained animals and i'll explain why. All of our research into the intelligence of animals is predicated on the idea that their consciousness is within grasp of ours, and every test we do is trying to use food as incentive to do stupid tasks. meaning they in fact just want food. animals are all retarded BUT animal intelligence should be measured by their survival intelligence. Rats, Pigeons, Macaques, any animal which uses humans as their source of food is intelligent as they have adapted to the world as it eists, not how they may beleive it exists. animals which go extinct are dumb, even if they can do a crossword

>>19146523
Imagine being this oversocialized. It's no wonder people in generally are losing their minds.

When it comes to existence, suffering is the name of the game. The sooner you figure this out the better.

it doesn't really give any answers and just raises troublesome questions, but david foster wallace's essay "consider the lobster" is interesting and good and about this

>>19147002
what a retard lol

>>19146822
Sneed

>>19147002
Anything that can fly is already op

I went through a similar thing so let me leapfrog you past the research stage and into the thinking for yourself stage.

Animals and humans are equivalent. The animal experience of existence is less complex but it's not lesser. Dogs have wants and dreams - they're momentary, but they're real. They have things that they want to do and things that they don't want to do. They even have plans, and families, and they grieve. But dogs are not unique in this, it's just easier to see in dogs because they evolved to communicate with us. You can see this behaviour in almost all animals if you bother to fucking look. It's not a radical idea. Humans are animals - we are part of a type, we don't stand alone, and the best way to understand how an animal feels is simply to ask how YOU would feel in the same situation because YOU are an animal, fundamentally the same as everything else.

Should we treat cows a certain way? Well, do we treat humans that way? We should treat them the same.

Once you realise this, you therefore feel pulled to the conclusion that we should raise the standard of treatment of animals to that of humans. But this is false - it's an impossibility. Try to do it and you WILL fail. The only possible conclusion is the inverse: we should lower the standard of treatment of humans to that of animals.

And that is the stance that the thinking man takes.

There are ethnical ways to kill animals and we should, of course, implement them.

>>19147002
Talking about what an animal "believes" is stupid.

Whatever animals are, it is apparent that they react to things; and it would make zero biological sense for a living thing -- with the one basic mode of self-preservation -- to not have a mechanism within it to make it aware of itself in relation to other things. If an animal is "aware" enough to adapt to its new environment, I would say that is some level above dumb. Though, I'm not sure what your parameter of smart and dumb are.

>>19146523
I don't eat anything factory farmed. Egg and milk production causes too much suffering in my opinion. I will eat shrimp and clams and wild caught fish. I will sometimes eat meat that other people bought. I will eat hunted meat.

the logical conclusion without falling into id pol bumpersticker tote merch scream at you on social media is to get into the lab grown meat techno future.

>>19146742
Because suffering is intrinsically bad. The inherent badness of suffering is directly observable.

>>19147059
the virgin reducing suffering vs the chad increasing suffering

>>19146523
Pain is irrelevant, you should respect all creation. We are above nature but that doesn't mean that we have the right to destroy God's creation.

>>19146523
I only eat fish and chicken, because I do not respect them. There is no need for a black and white either/or in terms of eating meat. Haven't had pig for a decade or more precisely because I respect pigs.

>>19147168
You should be put in a human depository

>>19147146
pure reddit. die.

>>19146539
fpbp yet again

>>19147026
based

>>19146539
Anyone who has a thought like has failed in the simple task of observing the world.

>>19146539
/thread

>>19147449
Anyone who has a thought like this has failed in the simple task of being.

>>19147465
Sure buddy. You are writing on a literature board but you lack sensibility.

>>19147146
Suffering is inherent to this reality. To deny its existence or to attempt widespread alleviation, is a direct denial of objective observation. It is what it is. Organisms live by consuming other dead organisms. All life only proceeds by sacrifice of something else. This is inherent and unavoidable.

>>19147477
It is you who lacks sensibility. There is nobility in overcoming your primal nature, but there is nothing but disgrace in rejecting your divine heritage. Your fight against the human condition is doomed to failure and outs you as a mental miscreant and genetic deviant.
Man is master of all creatures great and small.

>>19147500
Made up on the spot

>>19147500
>Your fight against the human condition is doomed to failure and outs you as a mental miscreant and genetic deviant.
It's not a fight I'm aiming at. I just think humans aren't a superior form of life.
>Man is master of all creatures great and small.
Man is no superhero and he will go extinct sooner or later.

What you got is just a convenient truth you read on a book. Have you ever killed an animal to eat it?

>>19146523
It's much more sensible to just source your meat. Seriously it's really not that difficult. All butchering in the world isn't McDonalds grade cruelty. If you are willing to invest a little more, buy from a local butcher. It's really uninformed of you to assume its the same all across the board. Cows are bred to be eaten but if you're sourcing correctly you can support a farmer who gives them free grazing and a huge amount of land to be a stupid fucking cow on. Beyond that what does a cow want from life? They're not going to read fucking Shakespeare. Seriously, if they existed they were going to die anyways and alternatively be torn apart alive by some wild animal.

Explained in depth in the rosicrucian cosmo conception by max heindel
/thread

>>19146523
Te

>>19147146
It's literally impossible to reduce suffering to zero. Especially with capitalism being where it is, if you're not buying meat you're bombing innocent people with your tax dollars. Why does this issue differ any more than all the millions of other ways your causing suffering in the world? There are homeless people all over your city. Will you reduce your suffering by letting them stay with you? Do you not have guilt for living comfortably when most people live in shitholes without a chance to do anything? You're spending time posting on an anime board while people all over the world are begging for their lives and all this could be reduced if you gave up everything you have and joined Greenpeace. But you won't do that so gtfo

>>19147059
based

>>19147170
>We are above nature
you wish

>>19147553
>Beyond that what does a cow want from life? They're not going to read fucking Shakespeare.
what a sad person you must be

>>19146523
Animal farm

>>19146523
I would say eating meat isn't a necessity, perhaps being totally vegan isn't optimal diet, but do you eat the optimal diet right now? I would say cultural inertia plays a bigger role than genuine concerns about nutrition.

>>19146558
>Supplying enough people with only vegetables will decimate entire swaths of land where billions of animals live.
A lot of arable land is used to grow crops for animal feed. There is enough land already used for agriculture to feed the world's human population.

You have a point about lots of things being selfish, but that's not a reason to never abstain from harmful things. I could torture cats with pliars and excuse it by saying that I like it and that I do other things that are selfish, but that doesn't stop it being a bad act.

>>19147553
All slaughter is done at industrial slaughterhouses, they follow industry standard practices. "Source your meat" is meaningless when it comes to animal welfare.

>>19147610
EAT THE GRASS GOYIM

translators note: goyim means cattle

>>19147622
Just untrue.

>>19146523
I think like you. Retard, shills, or hylics, will always say that eating veal or pig, and eating a carrot, is the same thing, because supposedly, the carrot suffer as well. It's useless to discuss with those people.

>>19146539
Very unintelligent remark

>>19147707
there exists a hierarchy of consciousness

>>19147723
See >>19147707

>>19146539
t. archon

>>19147673
Farmers aren't allowed to slaughter their own animals. Animal slaughter works like any other business, economies of scale win out, the process is centralised in large companies which built industrial facilities. Even if your uncle Bill owns a small farm and looks after the animals well, he has no control over the slaughter.

>>19147737
t. hylic

veganism is based, compassion for animals is based, shilling for mcgriddles for FREE online is cringe. seethe. cope. rope.

>>19147977
I don't need to cope, I eat healthy, local food and I'm not ignorant of and isolated from the natural world like most vegans.

>>19147993
lol relax radagast the brown lmao

>>19146822
>waah reducing suffering is inconvenient therefore it's schizo therefore it's
lol cope and rope fag

>>19146539
Such a myopic view of the world and easily argued.

>>19147977
>>19146558
No offense to anyone here but vegans always appear so frail and weak. Even though I agree on the general philosophy it's impractical. The biggest advocates are also the biggest douche bags on the planet too so the movement fails to capture your normal citizen.

>>19146523
>For example, pigs are fairly intelligent and conscience beings who can experience varying levels of suffering. Knowing this, it should be considered unethical to inflict unnecessary pain upon them.
lol nigga. You're such a bleeding heart Humanist that you think pigs have rights. You are beyond redemption. Become vegan, smoke DMT, have a psychotic episode, and then curl up into a ball of quivering pain until they put you in the zoomer retirement pod

>>19148605
If you read my post until the end you'll notice I'm not a vegan, I'm not even a vegetarian.
I think vegans are rationally correct. Irrefutable, even. But I think not everything in life is guided by rationality at the end of the day.

>>19146822
sneed for good luck

>>19146523
>I'm trying to reduce the amount of suffering in the world.
This is a cringe utilitarian view. And using consciousness as a measure/justification for killing is absurd and leads to insanity pretty fast.
Suffering is only removed when Christ comes and transfigures the world. Until then we use suffering (and even suffering that animals have to bear the results of our sin) to become more like Christ.
Eating meat is not evil, and killing animals is at some points commanded by God, but of course it not as God initially planned it. If you don't like it become a monk and do not eat meat.

>>19148718
vegans aren't rationally correct because their theories have two fundamental flaws.
1. animal lives are as valuable as human lives and their suffering is equal (false)
even if you disagree with my refutation of #1:
2. a vegan diet is safe and healthy for humans
#2 is just patently false. it's been shown over and over again. it's unhealthy and it never will be healthy. humans are not herbivores, we cannot ferment fiber to produce fatty acids, we cannot get nutrients as well from plants where they're less bioavailable than in meat, and it requires supplementation with meat products, which is obvious to anybody with half a brain that it isn't as healthy as just eating the right food to begin with.

>>19146523
Read Pythagoras.

>>19147483
>blah blah blah blah blah

Shut up faggot

>>19147500
wrong, aliens are the true masters
you'll be singing a different tune when they decide to viciously probe your asshole, clit/cock, mouth, nose etc

>>19147553
>No, you don't understand, I'm not like the other meat eaters. I source my meat from a heckin local farmerino

>>19146523
Read this: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Studies_in_Pessimism/On_the_Sufferings_of_the_World
Although I prefer the Cambridge edition translations (pic related).And then read The World as Will and Representation. The 4th part of the book goes into morality.
>>19147483
>suffering is in inherent
Schopenhauer accepts this premise and still ends up believing that compassion is the basis for morality.

>>19146523
Whenever people see animals show signs of intimacy or empathy or self-awareness they always speak of "personhood", but this always struck me as narrow-minded and self-centeredly anthropomorphic. Clearly the capacity for other beings to display these traits does not mean they are more like us, it means that we all share something that just happens to be in us. These are not human traits of consciousness, but rather traits of consciousness that happen to appear in us. It's like seeing teeth in both dogs and humans and supposing that the dog is more 'like us" because they happen to have teeth too. When the reality is they both have teeth, just as they have other similarities, because they derived from the same origins and processes.

>>19147574
>>19146558
pic related footnote

>>19149061

>>19146539
Humans don't have souls and are here to serve the planet

>>19148605
>vegans always appear so frail and weak.
Lol

>>19148806
>1. animal lives are as valuable as human lives and their suffering is equal (false)
That's not the argument of veganism, the argument is that animal lives have some level of worth.

>#2 is just patently false. it's been shown over and over again. it's unhealthy and it never will be healthy. humans are not herbivores, we cannot ferment fiber to produce fatty acids, we cannot get nutrients as well from plants where they're less bioavailable than in meat, and it requires supplementation with meat products, which is obvious to anybody with half a brain that it isn't as healthy as just eating the right food to begin with.
The only supplement required is B12 which is added to several vegan foods like oat milk, so doesn't even need to be taken separately. Many non-vegans take supplements and eat foods with added vitamins anyway, it's not unique to veganism. As for fatty acids, you can get them from plants, for example walnuts.

>>19148806
Not him but how exactly do you prove human lives and animal lives have different values? How do objectively measure it exactly?

>>19149112
pic related also vegan
Yea people like to argue against the dumb vegan arguments. It is uncomfortable to argue against thoughtful ones.

>>19149112

>>19148823
Which piece of work?

>>19149128
How do you prove that other humans are even conscious? In order to have any hope for morality, you have to assume that others are conscious. I personally choose to believe I am not alone in this universe. And I extend this assumption to other beings besides humans. It's not objective.

>>19149157
Poke a rock with a pointy stick, it doesn't do anything.
Poke a dog with a pointy stick, it screeches.

>>19147002
Definitely need to nerf seagulls.

>>19147002
What you're talking about is a kind of evolutionary intelligence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgZ73Lc5VS8
>>19147023
what a retard lol

Just don't eat wasteful food products like fucking 20 "buffalo" wings (buffalo = baby chickens) and slimy frozen chicken thighs that aren't even good.

>>19146539
>t. kike

>>19146822
sneed

buytendik, mind of the dog

anything by uexkull

schopenhauer

>>19149683
>mind of a dog
thats gods work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tfVJ9oo2YI

>walnuts

Mostly produced in China, vegans love to claim veganism is better for the environment but they rely on imported foods. If you cannot be vegan solely on domestic, preferably local produce its not really environmentally friendly.

>>19150836
>whataboutisms
shove it up your ass golemoid, you are a scourge on this planet and our descendants will shit on your unmarked graves

>The Laws Keeping away the Demons text mentioned above spells out the kind of severe punishment that was to be inflicted upon those who mistreated beneficent animals. For example, a person who beats a shepherd dog to death is subject to 800 lashes each with two different kinds of whip.

>Moreover, the Zoroastrian legal texts state that it is a sin to 1) deprive animals of food; 2) fail to care for pregnant female dogs or for ones who have recently given birth; 3) beat or harm any trainable dog; 4) harm or kill cattle (except during ritual sacrifice); 5) harm any beast of burden; or 6) kill any beneficent animal

We have to go back.

>>19150892
Its not a whataboutism, the supposed environmental benefits is a key pillar of veganism but anybody using those arguments is a liar, a hypocrite or ignorant.

Yes we do have to go back to buying high quality locally produced food and products. Whether that be meat or not.

>>19146539
fpbp
/thread

>>19151268
You do not have a soul and are here to serve the alien master race who will soon be probing all your orifices

>>19146523
De Anima is the definitive source.

>>19146523
all people who've ever worked closely with cattle know some of them have genuine intelligence. I'd say pets resemble women and farm animals resemble men in how they interact with people and are treated by them.

surely a big portion of animals are pretty retarded, but some will showcase undeniable wit. you should just hope your beef chop came from a normie cow and not the Dosto of bovines.

>>19146539
t. hylic npc
holy shit imagine how crippled is the life of a man who doesnt deeply communicate with all living creatures

>>19150836
The USA is also a major producer of walnuts so your point is moot. In any case, walnuts were brought up about nutrition, bringing up the environmental impact is side-stepping.

>>19151359
>who doesnt deeply communicate with all living creatures
I can imagine communicating with a lead pencil, too. Schizophrenia doesn't give you a soul.

>>19146822
Sneed

>>19151321
I'll believe it when it happens. Meanwhile I'll keep using my God-given freewill to make animals serve my every whim.

Descartes was 100% correct on the animal question; they're nothing but biological automata.

>>19146822
>Devil not saying that "Mine will Ignore Fast!"

>>19151463
you seethe because your soulless existence is void of love from sinless creatures. an animal's love and trust is the echo of angles' prayers for a virtuous man.

>>19146822
SNEED

>>19151470
>>19151475
>people like this actually exist

>>19151728
Kike religion makes monsters of men.

>>19151728
>normal people exist

>>19146523
You don't have to believe animals are conscious in order to value them. It's not believing that animals aren't conscious that's the problem, but rather this utilitarian, positive qualia-maximizing calculus that only finds value in animals through their analogy with the human. I can simultaneously believe that humans are unique insofar as we and only we are conscious, and that animals (and plants, and rock formations, and other unconscious configurations of matter), despite their lack of consciousness, still have value.

>>19148744
It's so cringe when people use religion to justify their actions. Seriously, it has to be the lowest form of reasoning and it makes other people hate your religion.

>>19151841
>I'm normal!
kek, you're eternity's laughing stock, mutt.

>>19146539
Replace 'animal' with goyim, replace 'man' with Israel.

>>19146539
How do you know they dont? How do you know you do have a soul?

>>19146523
Look at the Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness.

> “The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from
experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Nonhuman animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.”

Also it's not necessary to eat animal products to remain healthy. But people have a vested interest in telling you it is, because they have to tell themselves that to maintain the belief that they're a good person. It's deeply uncomfortable to be confronted with the possibility that you aren't.

>>19152281
lmao western """"""""""""civilization""""""""""""""" needed 2,000 years to accept that uuuhhhh maybe animals are as alive as we are on their slant. Science! like that one faggot who deprived monkeys of their mothers to come to the STAGGERING conclusion that uhhhh maybe that's a pretty fucked up thing to do!

I want to grind these cunts to powder.

Idk OP I'm actually a vegan (unlike most of these faggots) and I do feel a lot healthier in general. If nothing else I'm way more relaxed than before. There's also the side benefit of never feeling guilty about killing animals. Most people like animals but also eat them and it disturbs them because for a single moment they identify with the animal, and then repress that identification. I don't have too.

>>19152304
based vegan chad

>>19146539
Yeah

>>19146523
Animals can not use syntax, therefore they are unable to think discursively, and therefore they have no access to knowledge of themselves or any concept of rights or suffering.

>>19152334
retard

>>19152362
There is no knowledge without dianoia. Discusive thought requires syntax to form syllogisms. Animals can not employ syntax. Therefore animals have no knowledge of any thing.

>>19146822
Sneed

>>19146523
Its interesting that veganism in its common sense only became a thing after the alienation of most of the population from their livestock. As if distance from them paradoxically made people care about them more.

Stuff like Some branches of Hinduism or Buddhism have a more mistifstical reason to oppose meat (while often still consuming it, but through ritual and all).

IDK I can care about animals, but not nearly enough or in the same sort of quala to feel bad about eating them by and large. Its also interesting that it seems to be more of a thing in urban environment rather than rural, though that again might be due to brain drain. Like, I wouldn't be opposed to eating a dog, but I would not like to eat my dog, not due to the essence of it being a dog, but that it is mine. Just seems miopic.

I find the subject interesting as a cause study of ontological development. Here is an interesting video about how animals were seen in relation to the community in different time periods in the west. They were seen as part of the community by and large, (like to an extent object) with the role of serving the community. Then later, in the enlightenment, there was more of a trend towards seeing them as automatons: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALWLELLlv6E

>>19147059
>the thinking man has a black-or-white mentality and then eventually gives up
I think you just mean "depressed."

>>19146822
Being against meat doesn't necessitate being a negative utilitarian. It's just the most common argument people use.

>>19146523
You can survive just fine without meat
>but muh proteins / look if I don't eat meat I lose 0.232% of health
who fucking cares, ethics > your life quality
>but animals die anyway with agriculture
70% of crops are used for animals, you are doing double the damage with meat
>b-but [whatever cope]
it's ethics. if you try to rationalize it you don't care
rationally speaking we should do eugenics and shoot every sub-optimal person in the head and blend it into yogurt so we don't waste resources
if you don't care you are free to admit it to yourself provided you don't lie to others by making arguments in bad faith
if you do care you already know what to do

>>19147002
Absolutely retarded post. Read Franz Dr Waal. Its not even true that every study uses food. And primate intelligence is well established. To just name one study, I read about a study where they taught macques how to bury seeds which sprung fruit. The macques proceeded to teach the rest of the macques the method.

>>19152760
>but animals die
shouldnt that be enough?
>if we dont kill this cow it'll.... eat grass until it dies anyways
Who cares if it dies by dysentery or by a bolt to the head?
Thats not ethics, that's choosing between ends a and b where a has useful products after the fact.

>>19147111
Based Schopenhauer

>>19152784
>Who cares if it dies by dysentery or by a bolt to the head?
Apply this to people
>but animals aren't people
then you don't care
it's fine to not care, it's ethics

>>19152392
>animals can't talk to me so we should breed them by the billions to kill and consume their bodies
>using some basic bitch greek terminology to larp like you've thought this through
lol and you clowns think vegans live in a disney movie

>>19152784
>Who cares if it dies by dysentery or by a bolt to the head? Thats not ethics, that's choosing between ends a and b where a has useful products after the fact.
Couldn't you use the same argument to argue for killing old people?

>>19152760
Based, fuck these subhumans.

>>19152784
You retards think onions is monocropped for vegan consumers, it's cucks like you we should be feeding into the macerator

>>19152817
Lmao baby's first argument with a carnie. Wait long enough and you'll see these big burly viking chads post that "they were born this way" (like faggots) and that the size and shape our teeth should dictate our lifestyle (but conveniently not the location of the male prostate).

>>19152834
>the size and shape our teeth should dictate our lifestyle
that's right, we definitely don't look like lions although the most common argument is "but muh lions" you're not a fucking lion, you're like a pig.

>>19152792
>>19152817
>Apply this to people
yes you can. And I dont think a cow cares how it dies, it just doesnt want to. Onions green isn't bad either. Ask people if they want to die by way x or way y, I dont see a problem with that.

If cows rise up and develop a class conscious and push for a change in their lot, thats fine, but until then. I hardly think Harry the bull cares much about the method of his exit from this life stage.

>>19152821
>You retards think onions is monocropped for vegan consumers
what?

>>19152869
>Onions green
(s)oylent green

>>19152846
You're a slave to your biological programming, get down on your knees and suck big daddy evolution's cock, and then let him fuck you in the ass because if your teeth should dictate your diet then the location of your prostate should dictate your sexuality.

>>19152869
>we should rape children because they're defenseless

>>19152893
>we should rape children because they're defenseless
we already do that by raising them and molding them as we see fit, what is your point here besides making a janky equivalent?

>>19152869
I think human beings have a responsibility toward the other living things on this Earth. Breeding billions of animals because of muh hedonism is unnecessary and it ultimately damages people themselves
It used to be that you'd eat meat once a week.
I am not completely against killing animals to eat but if you adopt an utilitarian vision of animal suffering then you enable factory farming and that is objectively awful if you have any ethics
the animals are inevitably miserable and their lives are torture until the end
small time local farmers have to keep up with industrial practices to get a profit so those animals suffer too
there's no justification for it if you have any ethics
it all boils down to ethics and people today have none so there's no real argument that stands, it's still wrong
I have looked into a farmer's stable a few times and I felt like crying, people are far too detached from the reality of things to understand what they're talking about

>>19152893
>get down on your knees and suck
do the same to your synthetic partialism God. You are a slave to a myopic ideology yourself.

>>19146822
SNEED

>>19152893
>You're a slave to your biological programming
you are a slave to the subsidized meat industry. without 60% of agricultural subsidies by the gubbament, meat would be prohibitively expensive for you. People before this retarded industrialized age eat meat only occasionally because you can't kill animals every day. You are literal cattle just as much as the cows you eat.

>>19152928
i don't live in muttmerica, didn't read, kill yourself

>>19152922
>big words mean i smart mommy
end it

>>19152913
>I think human beings have a responsibility toward the other living things on this Earth
why and to what extent? I dont disagree (in an aesthetic pov) But sans meat eating just seems doctrinal.
>you enable factory farming and that is objectively awful if you have any ethics
the animals are inevitably miserable
why? Is there some universal deficient between mechanized animal husbandry and the human benifits reaped from it?
>and their lives are torture until the end
Are you sure you are not watching polemic films?
>there's no justification for it if you have any ethics
There definitely is. this only is a problem if you already pre establish relative worth.
>it all boils down to ethics and people today have none so there's no real argument that stands, it's still wrong
absolutely disagree, humans are essentially moral animals by and large, its simply that ethics are not cut and dry in conceptualization,
>I have looked into a farmer's stable a few times and I felt like crying, people are far too detached from the reality of things to understand what they're talking about
That might be your take, but its not necessarily an objective one.

>>19152933
>synthetic, partialism, myopic, and ideology are too big of words

>>19152975
>humans are essentially moral animals by and large
I'm surrounded by literal children.

>>19152980
>eating fruits and vegetables is dangerous and unethical

>>19152997
>eating fruits and vegetables is dangerous and unethical
I never said this, are you just responding to a checklist or something?
>I'm surrounded by literal children.
wdym? Im saying that most everything humans do they do under an ethical lense. Was it the moral animal part? I am saying humans seem to be creatures that intimately function on a moral level.

>>19153026
the anon you are responding to is not me (>>19152760). I generally make one post and do not bother with the arguing since it's largely fruitless

>>19152623
It seems you're right, most of the vegans I know are highly isolated from the natural world, they think animals are 'cute' but don't like actually touching them.

Its this weird disconnect where people unwilling to eat animals don't seem to understand or respect them.

>>19152623
>As if distance from them paradoxically made people care about them more.
This is just false. Some 75% of vegans and vegetarians in America just lie. They eat meat regularly. Just like being woke, it's all about virtue signaling. This is why veganism is largely a yuppie upper class thing and not some kind of ethical movement. In reality nobody gives a fucking fuck about animals and the only people who do are utterly mocked for having ethics, because the issue here is ethics without the pretension of caring about other people. In reality, human beings do not give a fuck about other people either.
Human beings are fucking garbage.

>>19153226
>In reality, human beings do not give a fuck about other people either.
>Human beings are fucking garbage.
I very much disagree, id say its more an issue of how and to what degree humans value others rather than them "not giving a fuck". the problem isnt a lack of care, its that care is directed in different ways, weither to a small cliche of people you like, to an ideology, to a nation, to a cause, to an aesthetic, to a person, to their own ego in relation to others. Its just that care juice is limited and spent in different ways rather then apathy.

We are social creatures.

I think the human animal is meant to care for a relatively small system of interactive parts, not the massive system we created by putting system on top of system exponentially. Humans arent garbage, its that they care too much for too many things. Humans are the most loving creatures on earth, but due to the multiplicity of this love, they will inevitably come into conflict, with all the myriad of systems and subsystems coming into play in that conflict.
>>19153145
understandable.