/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12204013]

>tfw vegetarians are morally correct

[Anonymous No.12204212]

>believing in objective morality

[Anonymous No.12204244]

>>12204013
>if you accept these specious and/or false premises, eating meat is "unethical"!

[Anonymous No.12204528]

>>12204244
but animals suffer in inhuman conditions by the millions. Isnt that immoral? Dont you have a heart????

[Anonymous No.12204557]

>>12204528

Animals can't suffer if they don't have consciousness.

[Anonymous No.12204560]

>>12204013
Go to the shower and sleep. To work tomorrow. No other advice will come.

[Anonymous No.12204571]

>>12204528
>animals suffer in inhuman conditions
I see what you did here

[Anonymous No.12204621]

>>12204557
lol disassociated urbanoid

[Anonymous No.12204643]

>>12204557
but they can feel pain and go insane from the cramped living conditions. Isnt this an immoral action being done onto one who cant consent?????

[Anonymous No.12204716]

>>12204621
Ah yes, only bugmen living in clown hives think eating meat is ethical.

[Anonymous No.12204731]

>>12204643
Enjoy chugging cockroach milk to wash down your cricket patty.

[Anonymous No.12204737]

How is the suffering of animals of any moral importance?

[Anonymous No.12204902]

>>12204737
The process, and manufacture of meat products is immoral, since it brings unnecessary suffering to a living creature that can reciprocate pain and suffering. All humans who eat meat and meat produce are taking part in this needless suffering, shouldn't it stop?

[Anonymous No.12204907]

>>12204902
suffering is fine

[Anonymous No.12204917]

>>12204557
Man it's so fucking insane that normies have such globofucked theories of mind that they can't use basic analogy to infer that most animals are mental in the same way humans are (or else we have no good grounds for inferring that other humans have consciousness from their behaviour)

[Anonymous No.12204927]

Vegetarian here. Don't see a point in eating meat since I like animals. Helps the environment in the little way I can too so that's a plus. I'd prefer if people didn't eat meat or destroy the environment but I can only change me.

[Anonymous No.12204929]

>>12204907
but it's suffering that is directly inferred by our actions. It's not suffering brought on by the general malaise and nature of life. It is a forceful burden brought on with a constricting standard of living

[Anonymous No.12204932]

>>12204917
it's obviously to justify their abuse of animals. Most of our conscious experience comes from brain structures we share with other animals, it's just our massive neocortex that sets us apart, which deals with abstract thought, language, etc.

btw i eat meat I just dont care about morality

[Anonymous No.12204944]

>>12204929
I simply don't care if the animals suffer.

Going down to my kitchen now to cook lamb chops in butter. Might have suet dumplings on the side.

[Anonymous No.12204952]

It's morally repugnant to eat plants. Think about it. Plants are the most innocent beings on this planet: they're immobile, helpless, can't defend themselves or their offspring. Not only that, but unlike useless fucking animals, plants produce oxygen, the very thing that allows us to live, and how do we pay them for it? With deforestation and turning them into salads. Vegetarians are literally disgusting.

[Anonymous No.12204971]

>>12204929
that doesnt explain how its of any moral importance

[Anonymous No.12204976]

Like yeah the meat industry is gross and even bad for earth but why focus on it when it’s a grain of sand on a beach. Smog getting blown out of cars all day and factories, consumer goods that will never biodegrade. The methane cows release is a drop in the bucket compared to everything else. I don’t get hit vegans can convince themselves they’re educated about the environment when even if every human being in earth behaved like them ( they won’t ) we’re still fucked. In fact, all you atheist militant vegans should be embracing the simple pleasures we have on this mortal coil while we can.

[Anonymous No.12204979]

>>12204944
look at this badass everyone

[Anonymous No.12204981]

>>12204976
>whataboutism

[Anonymous No.12204991]

>>12204981
I’m conceding that the meat industry has problems. I think I just have a bigger perspective than you. This is just how I feel and I’ve never heard a plant eater even TRY to refute this line of thinking. Ever.

[Anonymous No.12205006]

>>12204976
>Like yeah
>gross
>le climate change will kill us all
>simple pleasures
youre a faggot

[Anonymous No.12205007]

>>12204212
>beliving in morality

[Anonymous No.12205018]

>>12205006
Fuck off christfag, shouldn’t you be jerking your sick to passion of the Christ

[Anonymous No.12205024]

>>12204991
your line of thinking is 'everything is going to collapse'(a completely unproven contention) 'so let's just do whatever'

it's the thinking of a toddler who has been put in time out and realizes he has nothing to lose and so throws a tantrum

[Anonymous No.12205038]

>>12204932
i thought most people thought like this. oh well, people are dumb.

[Anonymous No.12205040]

>>12204976
Furthermore are we gonna pretend than veganisn isn’t an expression of classist capitalism? It has so much fashion and cottage industry built in around it. It’s superficial as FUCK. Only a faggot with a god complex would think they’re saving the earth. They really really aren’t because if they cared about the issues they profess they do they wouldn’t drive cars, instead these issues are bandied around as a vehicle for moral superiority. It’s transparent to most people which is what they mean when they say vegans are preachy, they just don’t articulate it like I just did.

[Anonymous No.12205046]

>>12204952
not wrong, but if you're going to argue from plant morality then plant abuse is real, and the society is not prepared to deal with it.

[Anonymous No.12205048]

>>12205024
I actually couldn’t say if it is or isn’t going to. I don’t know. Vegetarians are the ones claiming they’re literally saving the earth/humanity. I’m playing in their sandbox and simply showing that by that logic they’re wrong. That’s pretty obvious, try harder gaywad.

[Anonymous No.12205051]

>>12205048
im not vegetarian but they are 100% right that animals are conscious and suffer and that eating meat is immoral
you have to be a slimy dishonest coward not to see this, which you clearly are.

[Anonymous No.12205067]

>>12204013
Morals don't keep your stomach full.

[Anonymous No.12205069]

>>12205067
consider for a moment how retarded you are

[Anonymous No.12205071]

>>12205051
The suffering is a different issue entirely but I can use the exact same argument. The famine and human suffering across the world is tremendous and it’s actually inhumane to ignore it in favor of animals. I can see that animals going extinct is a huge issue for the world but approaching it as a moral issue is useless ( as we see in society. Nobody is convinced. ) because we’re biologically constructed to be omnivores. Denying us this is tantamount to denying people their own sexuality and innate state of being. People can and do argue the morals of this all day but it goes nowhere. And again, it’s hard to take it seriously when it’s upper and middle class whites driving things like the almond milk industry. It’s just as uppity as demanding gluten free food when you don’t have celiac disease. All the talking heads for the cause are dumb celebrities and the whole practice has always been reserved for bleeding hearts more concerned with the neighborhood dog than the nigborhood homeless.

[Anonymous No.12205079]

>>12205071
We're also 'biologically constructed' to kill that guy in the next tribe over

you keep pointing out that the people who promote this stuff are hypocrites, but you arent discussing the actual issue. You make a false dichotomy between human and animal suffering- not eating meat has zero impact on whether you can help humans or not.

you are literally afraid of thinking of yourself as immoral, it's pathetic, youre like a woman

[Anonymous No.12205104]

>>12205079
>biologically constructed to kill
Uhm no sweetie. We’re biologically constructed to be communal/tribal. A human being needs others to survive in the wild, we’re social beings not killers. We’ve killed to survive not because we see another person and think “ I should kill them”

>false dichotomy
Haha not even close. There are a limited number of resources. Remember when I mentioned almond milk? Did you know it takes more water to grow them than normal crops? Like an ungodly amount. We could use that to feed animals and even people. A lot of the vegan fad diet consumer goods are harder to produce than the streamlined goods we already have. They’re “specialty” items. All these resources, monies, time, and energy would be better served giving it to people. Worried about the environment? Give up your car. You say I’m immoral but I never claimed to be otherwise, unlike you. I’m just knocking you down off your high horse and you don’t like it.

[Anonymous No.12205112]

desu The biggest issue for meat eaters.

Is arguing that it's ok to eat a cow because it's not smart and is inferior but telling me it's not ok to eat the mentally retarded. The only reason I shouldn't be allowed to dine on tards is because they are the property of someone else.
Pretty hard to argue to me why it's not acceptable to eat a retard but it is ok to eat an equally intelligent cow or some shit. Moralfags get onto me about "They're people" like people are magically deserving of moral consideration when I have no reason to extend it to them.

[Anonymous No.12205122]

>>12205112
dont bother, moralfags don't understand physics.

[Anonymous No.12205126]

>>12205112
>implying they need to be logically consistent

[Anonymous No.12205128]

>>12205104
>almond milk
youre a literal retard, you can subsist off lentils and rice for far less money and resources than meat

also im not a vegetarian, and i explicitly said im not moral

[Anonymous No.12205167]

>>12205128
Nobody subsists off lentils and rice lmao. Nigga are you serious right now? Is that what you do? You just eat lentils? If you do feel free to tell me. Do you even comprehend what you’re saying right now? Yeah, tell the whole world tonest rice. Ok.

First I challenged you on the scientific grounds and raped your ( obviously virgin ) asshole. Still waiting for a refutation of the exact carbon footprint of meat eaters vs other environmental pollutants. When you ignored this we moved on to moral arguments.

I proceeded to explain to you I wasn’t arguing from a moral place but gave a quick summary of biological significance of eating meat ( dragging you kicking and screaming back to science ) but you told me you never claimed to be moral while making a moral assessment? Okayyyy

Still waiting on some sort of statement about capitalism and how it relates to veganisn and it’s various and detrimental cottage industries, and how to fits in culturally ( nobody likes privileged vegans ) but feel free to keep flossing over it like somehow it isn’t the heart of the reason why people hate this shit.

And here we are. You just told me to eat rice. I think it’s obvious that you’re a faggot of the highest magnitude.

[Anonymous No.12205200]

>>12205112
>t. read Singer once
These tired babby arguments have been btfo so many times it's not even funny anymore.

[Anonymous No.12205214]

>>12205167
A lot of people subsist mostly off rice actually, like half of China. I didnt tell you to do anything, i pointed out that your decision to eat meat is immoral, and that it's easy as fuck, actually will cost you less money, to not eat it.

[Anonymous No.12205231]

>>12205214
No. In China they don’t simply “just eat rice” you fucking idiot. That’s actually pretty racist. There’s a huge industry for seafood and I’ve actially seen animal activists take issue with their eating of insects. Also you mean the same China as the one billowing black smoke so thick into the air they have to wear face masks to go out in public? Yeah if they are eating vegan there it looks like it’s REALLY helping.

I can’t help but to notice you’re notable silent on every other thing I said.

[Anonymous No.12205234]

>>12205231
youre still avoiding the fact that you could very easily not eat meat, and your choice to do so causes pointless suffering

i get that you just cant deal with this

[Anonymous No.12205288]

>>12205234
I’m not avoiding anything. I’m not some ignormaus that doesn’t understand the implications of factory farming. I understand all too well and I’m ok with eating meat, it’s really ok. I’ve faced my personal and moral obligations of how I feel about it and you simply don’t like it. To me it feels like you’re the one avoiding the issues.

Every argument presented is easily beatable other than “muh moralism” which simply is not a good argument. Even if you’re morally correct ( you aren’t ) somehow you can do the mental gymnastics to convince yourself human beings are simple willed killing machines but also posses high minded moralism. Sure kid. Having morals about such a specific issue so emphatically is simply a way of saying “ I don’t like it” even if you do yourself eat meat. It’s not hard to see why animal activism is an analogue to religion. If we get down past the fake pseudo-science between the products and the retention of powdered B-12 and all the other superfluous bullshit you’re just left with an unconvincing argument about something that’s pretty silly. You think it’s appropriate to publicly advocate for people to live on lentils? It speaks to a lack of serious self awareness that you could even say that out loud and think it was worth saying relative to what’s happening on this earth.

[Anonymous No.12205372]

>>12205288
oh the horror of eating lentils
if you were truly comfortable with your decision you wouldnt be this butthurt

there is zero justification for you to eat meat, once again, it costs you more not less money

[Anonymous No.12205403]

>>12205372
Do you actually believe I have some sort of existential angst eating a cheeseburger? That I have guilt? Do you think everyone that doesn’t have the same views as you must feel hat way? Come on now. People much less thoughtful than me shovel meat into their face holes everyday, since always. It isn’t shit. I also don’t understand your fixation with the financial aspect of this. Are you saying spending money on meat is immoral because spending money on pleasurable things is bad? Or are you trying to imply that it could be better spent on animals and charity? Because again that’s classist as shit. The average citizen doesn’t have enough money to do much with it but you know who does? Giant corporate entities like Follow Your Heart, SilkMilk, and by god the onions industry. I can assure you people don’t give a fuck about eating meat, it’s not even worth spending intellectual time with for most.

[Anonymous No.12205435]

>>12205403
I know very well you feel guilty about it, you keep trying to wriggle out of the fact that it's immoral

your attempts to shame me as being racist or classist are incidentally very amusing

you also keep making it this either-or thing. you can litearlly just stop eating meat and eat other things and it has nothing at all to do with charity, wiht human poverty, with anything at all.

youre so mad you are becoming literally incoherent

[Anonymous No.12205444]

I'm an ethical vegetarian. Other people simply don't care about animals. It's all about whether or not you empathize with animals. Some people just don't. There is no moral or philosophical argument because for some people animals are simply not important.

[Anonymous No.12205467]

>>12205040

You can be a vegan or vegetarian easily without all the bells and whistles. It's capitalism marketing all the meat substitutes and products to you and "influencers" that try to get you to buy it. All you have to do to eat vegetarian/vegan is go to the farmer's market.

[Anonymous No.12205476]

>>12205372
>there is zero justification for you to eat meat
I like the taste. Faggot.

[Anonymous No.12205487]

>>12205476
moral justification
you know im right and it upsets you so you adopt this faux-tough guy persona when the topic comes up

[Anonymous No.12205498]

>>12205467

yeah seriously whenever people say its class privilege to be vegan/vegeteratian im just thinking, have you ever heard of fucking lentils and beans and rice, aka, what the majority of the subaltern world lives on.

[Anonymous No.12205507]

>>12205435
Ok kid. It’s interesting that you got btfo’d on the science and went straight to moralism. You wont believe me but I actually spent years of my life working at a vegan diner. It’s why I know so much about the industry in the first place. I don’t feel bad.

You haven’t really argued anything relevant other than assuming how I must feel, which is absurd. You can’t argue any of the points I put forward and then you want to pretend like I’m so upset that I can be dismissed. 99% of humans that have existed must be immoral for eating meat, because that makes SO much sense.

[Anonymous No.12205515]

>>12205507
bro the argument is so simple a child can understand it
animals suffer so dont hurt them if you dont need to

you cant argue your way out of this, there is no way

[Anonymous No.12205516]

Vegetarians are the same as pro-life nuts who insist on calling abortions 'murder' - purest brand of hypocrites. It's not even a matter of debate, their actions explicitly show the nature of their character.
Imagine for example, that government made it legal to murder babies up to 5 years old, and the majority of population was okay with it. Could you comfortably exist within such society? Could you go on about your daily life knowing that every kid under 5 could be purged with impunity at any moment? Could you limit your criticism of such system to occasional whining on Internet forums? I'm sure most people wouldn't bear the daily struggle of living in what is effectively a society a psychopaths to them. Yet, prolifers go on about their lives just alright, mentally stable, sleeping tight at night. They'll throw big words like 'inhuman' and 'murder' when arguing with pro-choice people, but their own behavior betrays the fact that this is merely self-gratification to them. Vegetarians are the same - they """"care"""" about animals so long as it's feeding their sense of decency, but their behavior betrays the fact that they don't ACTUALLY give a single fuck about billions of cows getting slaughtered annually. Which is fine. Fuck cows, they exist to be my steak, such is their purpose.

[Anonymous No.12205517]

>>12205487
I don't need to morally justify anything that isn't in the plane of moral at all.

[Anonymous No.12205523]

>>12205435
Just accept the fact that some people aren't concerned with appearing to be morally superior than other people by not partaking in pointless actions such as not eating meat. It'd be better if you'd argue your point from a pragmatic standpoint instead of trying to guilt people who could give less than a hair on their ass about about being ethical to the poor animals. And you have yet to address the points he brought up repeatedly that you obviously have been ignoring.

[Anonymous No.12205524]

>>12205517
absolute cope
have fun repressing your guilt

[Anonymous No.12205536]

>>12205523
i dont care about any of his other points. he could today stop eating meat, with barely any effort, and that would prevent the suffering of animals. I am pointing out that he's immoral about this, and it's a huge impact too, the torture of hundreds of sentient beings

also i have no interest in converting people to vegetarianism, im not vegetarian

[Anonymous No.12205537]

>>12204952
Who do fruits grow for?

[Anonymous No.12205539]

>>12205524
>n-no you are feeling guilty!
>h-haha c-cope...

[Anonymous No.12205546]

>>12205539
he wouldnt have made the first reply otherwise. it's an attempt to justify his behavior

[Anonymous No.12205558]

>>12205546
Who's "he"? I'm the guy and my first reply was >>12205476 You're really quite bad at this "ebyn trolling" thing.

[Anonymous No.12205569]

>>12205558
yeah you wouldnt have made that post if you didnt feel the compulsion to justify your behavior. You posture as an uncaring person when this topic comes up because it's a way for you to hide from your immorality. It's very obvious

[Anonymous No.12205577]

>wears shoes sewn by south-east asian children in terrible conditions for pennies
>B-BUT POOR COWS THEY'RE FEELING SCARED FOR A MINUTE AT ABBOTOIRS
We should unironically just eat vegetarians.

[Anonymous No.12205582]

Most meat-eaters deep down know what they do is wrong, but, unlike the meat they consume, they cannot stomach this fact. And so they resort to propping up pathetic, dishonest "arguments" about how "eating plants is like basically the same, man" or "who cares man, there's like the X and the Y problem also in the world, so that means I can't help change problem Z here" It's sad, because discussion cannot happen when the people in it won't even be honest with themselves.

[Anonymous No.12205594]

>>12204952
Plants don't have a central nervous system, they don't suffer like animals. They're not sentient. This is a retarded argument.

If you want your excuse for eating animals just say that you have no empathy. It's okay, 95%+ of people on Earth don't give a shit either. I don't understand why people who eat meat can't just say they don't care. That's actually the real reason. If you cared and had empathy you'd stop.

[Anonymous No.12205597]

>>12205569
>can't into argumentative discussion
>"psychoanalyses" internet posts
I made that post because you said there's no justification to eat meat and I disagreed, fag.

[Anonymous No.12205598]

>>12204013
under no circumstance is a man who consumes only beans and potatoes and whatever else vegetables to be considered even in the most a hygienic being of squeamish taste, but not likely a moral being fit for either companionship or long-term affairs of the heart, being themselves ignorant and intolerant of a routine and sacred custom.

[Anonymous No.12205601]

>>12205577
This argument assumes that vegetarians are OK with human beings being mistreated and living like shit. Which is retarded.

[Anonymous No.12205602]

>>12205594
most people do have empathy, just selective empathy. Having empathy for animals is a bit odd really, there isnt much reason for it to have evolved outside of pets.

that doesnt change that it's immoral obviously but people dont actually care about morality as this thread shows very clearly

[Anonymous No.12205603]

>>12205467
Hey I wrote that post and I agree.

Ding ding ding!

That’s the right response anon. That’s all you have to say, what I’m getting at is a cultural critique. I’m a capitalist so I see nothing wrong with vegans starting their own industries, but I only argue from their own points of view at times. The fact that you see this way makes
Me think you’re sensible, and I’d buy you a beer. I don’t care that you eat plants.

>>12205546
You sound like a dad that wants to punish baby. Come on daddy, make me pay. Maybe when I die the devil can take his big pitchfork and stab my ass for being naughty enough to eat at McDonald’s.

[Anonymous No.12205608]

>>12205498

I am allergic to onions and legumes sadly enough. Break out in hives when I eat them. I still manage to be a vegetarian though without meat substitutes and that. Not very hard.

Healthy too. It's just my normal life without burgers and stuff. I really like potatoes though so I think that helps.

[Anonymous No.12205611]

>>12205597
that's not a real justification, you wouldnt use that as an argument for eating people, and both people and animals suffer.
inb4 you strawman this as me saying animals and humans are the same

absolutely tiresome

[Anonymous No.12205620]

>>12205603
i really dont care if people eat meat, i just find the reactions to this topic amusing

[Anonymous No.12205621]

>>12205601
If they were not OK with it, they'd prioritize it instead of campaigning for more couscous patties at whole foods.

[Anonymous No.12205625]

>>12205608
I feel sorry for your endocrine system. Eat some synthetic B-12 but don’t expect it to absorb as well as meat products my nig.

[Anonymous No.12205626]

>>12205608

Damn it. I forgot the word filter was still active. I do eat onions. Potatoes, peppers, and onions. Good stuff.

[Anonymous No.12205629]

>>12205611
>inb4 you strawman this as me saying animals and humans are the same
They clearly aren't. That's why I'm perfectly fine with eating the former, but not the other.

[Anonymous No.12205630]

>>12205620
Yeah they’re pretty trolly

[Anonymous No.12205632]

>>12205598
books on this feel?

[Anonymous No.12205637]

>>12205629
i see you deliberately missed the part where i point out the commonality of suffering being the relevant bit

i cant say im surprised

also youre not perfectly fine, you just deny it to yourself

[Anonymous No.12205638]

>>12205577
>still wears shoes sewn by south-east asian children in terrible conditions for pennies
>criticizes vegetarians for abstaining from a thing that has no impact whatsoever with anything else
>somehow claims to be more moral because he gives even less of a shit

[Anonymous No.12205644]

>>12205594
>Plants don't have a central nervous system, they don't suffer like animals. They're not sentient. This is a retarded argument.
Why is CNS a dealbreaker? I thought morality is supposed to be based on principal values, not on who feels the ouchies. I made a very logical argument for why plants produce more goodness and why mistreating them is a greater injustice, CNS is irrelevant to such argument. In your system of values, apparently it's alright to kill and eat paralized humans, after all they wouldn't feel a thing!

[Anonymous No.12205645]

>>12205625

I admit I am not a vegan. Still eat cheese and stuff. Not as much as I used to but still a bit. I'm not a vegan paladin or anything.

[Anonymous No.12205646]

>>12205515
Minimising suffering to animals isn't some sort of prime directive that any empathetic person simply has to follow.

I see that animals suffer to provide me with meat.
I am a reasonable and nice person to people and animals around me.
I eat meat regardless.

[Anonymous No.12205648]

>>12205637
Animals don't "suffer". Your word games are not impressing anyone.

[Anonymous No.12205649]

>>12205621
See >>12205638

[Anonymous No.12205651]

>>12205646
>I am a reasonable and nice person to people and animals around me.
you can't do this while eating meat lol

just accept that youre not moral about this

[Anonymous No.12205657]

>>12205648
really, because animals have the same brain structures that we do for the most part, including the ability to feel pain. Many of them have complex emotions as well

you surely arent saying that suffering is somethign that occurs only in the abstract thought portions of the brain, that would be beyond retarded

[Anonymous No.12205659]

>>12205648
>Science proved they feel pain and stress
>Science proved they're sentient
>Science proved they have thoughts
>Science proved they have a consciousness
>lol no lalalalalala I'm not listening

[Anonymous No.12205661]

>>12205651
I don't think that animals have moral relevance - how can you explain the fact that I can eat meat one moment and go outside to refill my bird feeder the next?

[Anonymous No.12205664]

>muh ethics
I could probably whip out plausible ethics framework why eating vegans is not only morally right but a virtue if I had more booze and bag of shrooms in no time.

[Anonymous No.12205668]

>>12205659
They don't existentially suffer in the way humans can.

[Anonymous No.12205669]

>>12205661
Youre inconsistent like the rest of humanity, our empathy evolved in a haphazard instrumental way

[Anonymous No.12205671]

>>12205657
"Suffering" is a human concept, dumdum. Just like "dreams", "morality", "philosophy", or "abstraining from meat for retarded reasons" Animals do have these concepts in their underdeveloped brains. They're organic automatons, following simplistic commands of their primitive instincts. We are the only creatures capable of giving pain a meaning.

[Anonymous No.12205677]

>>12205668
Sure, but they suffer. Is existential suffering that much worse than physical torture?

[Anonymous No.12205680]

>>12205657
>animals have the same brain structures that we do
Yeah, hence my point that we should just eat vegans cause your brain structures resemble that of animals much more than that of humans.

[Anonymous No.12205684]

>>12205659
>science proved animals are just like us!
Yeah, look at all these civilizations built by cows and don't forget their amazing corpus of poetry. One cannot ignore their ideas on physics and political values too!

[Anonymous No.12205685]

This thread reeks of vaginal males. Vagimales.

[Anonymous No.12205688]

>>12205648

>has never spent time around animals

[Anonymous No.12205689]

>>12205668
Just say that you don't care, for fuck's sake. Why is it so hard to just say that?

[Anonymous No.12205693]

>>12205680
Im not vegan, im making an enormous pot of chili right now. 1.5kg of beef

just accept that youre immoral, it's not the end of the world

[Anonymous No.12205698]

>>12205677
>Is existential suffering that much worse than physical torture?
Yes, it's literally the only suffering that deserves to be called such. And animals aren't "tortured" they're raised healthy and fed well until being killed swiftly and painlessly.

[Anonymous No.12205702]

>>12205684
>>12205680
>>12205668
So it's okay to kill and torture retards?

[Anonymous No.12205704]

>>12205669
>like the rest of humanity

Found the troll

[Anonymous No.12205706]

>>12205693
>just accept my autism
Uh, no, bubbah. There's nothing immoral about eating meat. Nothing.

[Anonymous No.12205707]

>>12205698
k dont mind me while i torture toddlers then since theyre not selfaware yet
also lel at your conception of slaughterhouses

[Anonymous No.12205714]

>>12205677
I think so - Robert Francois Damiens must have suffered more than any beef cow because his mind could comprehend the magnitude of the horror being inflicted on his body.

[Anonymous No.12205715]

>>12205706
youre causing unnecessary pain simply to give yourself physical pleasure, youre basically a rapist tbqh

[Anonymous No.12205716]

>>12205707
>i torture toddlers
see >>12205200 brainlet

[Anonymous No.12205718]

>>12205707
This is the type of person that firebombs zoos because they view human and animal life the same. We all have existential god holes that need to be filled in this era but veganisn is especially retarted. I guess I’m happy the vegans found him before the Scientologists.

[Anonymous No.12205720]

>>12205698
>Yes, it's literally the only suffering that deserves to be called such.
You honestly deserve to be physically tortured for being this much of a brainlet. Just say you don't care. That's so easy. You don't care.

>>12205698
>animals aren't "tortured" they're raised healthy and fed well until being killed swiftly and painlessly.
Countless documentaries available everywhere on the internet prove otherwise. But again, you don't care. You don't care if this is true or not, because you have no empathy. Just admit it, it's okay.

[Anonymous No.12205722]

>>12205689
I don't care, as I have stated repeatedly. The suffering of animals for our food is natural, right, and inconsequential.

[Anonymous No.12205730]

>>12205715
Au contraire. My eating habits cause the industry to bring thousands of extra heads of cattle into existence. They get to experience the pleasure of being, which is indeed the greatest pleasure out there. I'm basically a cow saint.

[Anonymous No.12205732]

>>12205720
>documentaries

Oh my god we’ve got a live one

[Anonymous No.12205735]

>>12205730
Based and flesh pilled.

[Anonymous No.12205738]

>>12205693
Not him, but here's your (You) anyway, cuntboi.

[Anonymous No.12205741]

>>12205718
im not vegan, for the hundredth time m8, i am literally making a meal with meat right now

[Anonymous No.12205745]

>>12205741
Even more pathetic

[Anonymous No.12205747]

>>12205720
>reee! reee! brainlet! u deserve! u dun care!
Not an argument.
>Countless documentaries available everywhere on the internet prove otherwise.
There are also countless documentaries that show abstaining from meat is profoundly unhealthy, which nullifies your autism entirely. Pro-tip: "there's a youtube video" is not an argument either.

[Anonymous No.12205750]

>>12205738

[Anonymous No.12205756]

>>12205730
yeah but their lives suck

[Anonymous No.12205757]

>>12205698
>Yes, it's literally the only suffering that deserves to be called such.

This is absolutely correct

[Anonymous No.12205764]

This is why bullying is such a psychological/evolutionarily sophisticated social tool. The kid in this thread is a victim honestly. We should feel bad that he was never shunned enough to grow into an actual human being.

[Anonymous No.12205770]

>>12205684
Human babies, children, teenagers and the elderly are all incapable of creating civilization too. Everyone outside of adults, basically. Are they fair game for food, then? Why not eat them too, anon? :)

[Anonymous No.12205771]

>>12205756
So does your mom, but you didn't try and stop all those people eating her out, did you?

[Anonymous No.12205774]

>>12205770

>>12205200

[Anonymous No.12205778]

>>12205774
m8 saying something has been btfod is not an argument
this is just sad watching you all devolve into middle school insults to protect your ridiculous feelings of being moral

[Anonymous No.12205793]

>>12205778
It's more sad watching you being unable to produce an actual argument and just go on to spam "u mad u immoral and mad" all thread long.

[Anonymous No.12205803]

>>12205793
my argument is very simple. Animals feel pain(and also negative emotions). You dont need to eat them. Eating them is causing them unnecessary pain. You do this for the ridiculous reason that they taste good.

you know you cant really argue with this

[Anonymous No.12205805]

>>12204013
dunno if this book is a good argument against meat consumption rather than an argument against the modern food industry and government overreach.

[Anonymous No.12205811]

>>12205803
>Eating them is causing them unnecessary pain.
See >>12205730

[Anonymous No.12205812]

>>12204212
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.12205820]

>>12205730
>>12205811
So breeding a species to torture and kill them is ok? I'll just do that with your offspring :^)

[Anonymous No.12205826]

>>12204013
There's no objective morality without God.
And God says animals are our food.
Hence, you've been BTFO.

[Anonymous No.12205827]

>>12205820
How many vaginas do you have?

[Anonymous No.12205834]

>>12205820
>resorts back at equating humans and animals
You see, this is pointless, because you're just a basic reddit bitch unable to hold a discussion.

[Anonymous No.12205835]

>>12205827
One, your mums that I'm banging right now.

[Anonymous No.12205837]

>>12205820
>So breeding a species to torture and kill them is ok?
Yes. As long as they are not human.

[Anonymous No.12205840]

>>12205834
we've already pointed out a bunch of times that the relevant part is that they feel pain

can i ask you why youre so determined to maintain your illusion of moral consistency

[Anonymous No.12205841]

>>12205834
Edgy ad hom bro

[Anonymous No.12205846]

>>12204013
Eating meat is not inherently bad. It's part of nature. Animals eat other animals. We are animals, therefore we eat other animals.

Is the industrial-scale processing of animals into food ethical? I don't know (though I lean towards "no"). It's a multi-layered question with no straight-forward answer.

One I can say for sure though, most vegans and vegetarians are just sanctimonious cunts who want to feel superior to the average person because they have nothing else but their ego going for them.

[Anonymous No.12205849]

OP, why would you do this?

Promoting vegetarianism is a no-no on the modern, mainstream internet, where everyone instantly turns up the edge to a 10 in order to justify their consumption of meat. Here's some I've plucked from above:

"Literal torture isn't suffering, existentialism is suffering, man!"

"Animals are conscious, emotional, feel pain, and are like humans in all the foundational aspects, but they AIN'T NO CIVILIZATION BUILDERS! Therefore, there is no problem of conscience in eating them."

"P-plants are also equally sentient, fruit trees will literally have their food fall on the ground and rot in the earth unless an animal eats them, therefore they are literally made for us to consume from, but eating vegetables and fruits that we ourselves have grown is like EQUALLY BAD as eating meat, man, so just let me have my cheeseburger okay?!?!"

Moral insensitives, all of you. As the other anons said, it isn't the end of the world to accept yourself as immoral. Acceptance is the first step to change. But if you want to instead simply dial up the edge whenever the topic comes up, and suddenly pretend yourself to be some sort of cold, unfeeling, entirely amoral operative who sees life much like a psychopath would, then ckntinue LARPing. One day, your conscience will prick you hard enough that you finally acknowledge your error, at the very least, and if you correct it afterwards that's up to you.

Don't respond to me, I've seen your type enough on the internet (the responses are literally the same every time, NPC's that you are) and I have already heard every "retort" you would give to me. Accept your immorality, or, if it's too difficult to, put on the best psychopath-LARP you can.

[Anonymous No.12205851]

>>12205826
The Demiurge of Genesis said so, maybe. Not so sure about God.

[Anonymous No.12205852]

>>12205840
>the relevant part is that they feel pain
No, that's the irrelevant part. You're not arguing against inhumane farming practices, you're arguing against animal husbandry at large, which makes you some sort of perverse bovine anti-natalist.

[Anonymous No.12205858]

>>12205852
woah m8 i didnt say we should stop farming, i said it's immoral, please keep up

[Anonymous No.12205861]

>>12205849
>d-don't respond to me N-NPCs
Upvoted and gilded.

[Anonymous No.12205867]

>>12205849
Hah! meat eaters BTFO! Here's some reddit gold for you broski, you won the internet today :)))

[Anonymous No.12205872]

>>12205638
Why do you waste your time, arguing with knaves?

[Anonymous No.12205876]

>>12205858
Your only argument for immorality is pain, i.e. you're only arguing against inhumane farming. Please, do try and keep up with yourself.

[Anonymous No.12205878]

>>12205876
all farming is inhumane

[Anonymous No.12205881]

>>12205878
Saying things doesn't make them true, brainletbro.

[Anonymous No.12205889]

>>12205881
implying im not a sharp wit
my mother has assured me of this

[Anonymous No.12205894]

>>12205467

Eating vegan/vegatarian can be dirt cheap, simply be mindful of what you buy and don't fall for the """substitutes"""

[Anonymous No.12205906]

>>12204902
Then you support local/free range farms and reduce meat intake to a sustainable level, unless you believe that all forms of rearing animals is unethical (due to the enviable suffering). If that’s the case then do you believe in antinatalism?

[Anonymous No.12205918]

>>12205846
Do tell me what about the modern industrial-process is "multi-layered" in terms of ethics. Is the argument that, on one hand, it is a severe mistreatment of sentient beings in order to expedite the process of turning then into product - which is bad - but on the other, Burgers get their burgers delivered to them quicker, and their satisfaction at the fact constitutes something good? Alas, a truly grey debate.

[Anonymous No.12205927]

>>12205849
>"Literal torture isn't suffering, existentialism is suffering, man!"
You should read Schopenhauer's short essay 'On the Suffering of World' which properly explains how humans suffer immeasurably more than animals.

[Anonymous No.12205928]

>>12205918
>oh no no no my burger burgers very bad burgers...
Fuck off, retard.

[Anonymous No.12205948]

>>12205928
Wow, I totally implied that making products from animals is fine even though eating them is not! You've exposed me for the hypocrite I am, with a single image! There is no such thing as being a "cruelty-free consumer", which many vegetarians and vegans also tend to partake in.

[Anonymous No.12205952]

>>12205756
Humans lives suck a lot more than animals, do you agree with birthing more children into the world?

[Anonymous No.12205955]

>>12205952
Having children is obviously immoral, almost everythign we do is immoral, but it's fine, we didnt evolve to be morality machines

[Anonymous No.12205960]

>>12205948
>There is no such thing as being a "cruelty-free consumer"
Of course there is. It's only predicated upon cruelty free farming as already pointed out ITT.

[Anonymous No.12205963]

>>12205955
>Having children is obviously immoral
You have to go back, David.

[Anonymous No.12205971]

>>12205963
my name is Edith Tarkington

[Anonymous No.12205972]

>>12205948
>le epic late stage capitalism meme

He bought it

[Anonymous No.12205973]

>>12205906
Vegetarian here. Since my basis is ethical I'm against all forms of animal exploitation.
Of course moving away from industrial farming would be a step in the right direction, but the issue is that you simply can't feed the current amount of population while keeping things "humane" for the animals. If smaller farms were the only source of meat they would have to adopt similar practices as industrial farms to maximize production. They already do.
The problem with meat is closely tied with human popoulation. We're just too fucking many and those who eat meat eat way too much of it in their diets so it's inevitable that animals get treated like shit. We can't go back to happy local little farms.

Of course the problem simply doesn't exist for those who eat meat. It's only a problem for people who care about the animals which is like 5%.

[Anonymous No.12205981]

>>12205971
My condolences.

[Anonymous No.12205989]

>>12205981
the Tarkingtons are an ancient and venerable family you pleb

[Anonymous No.12206010]

>>12205973
Of everyone stopped eating meat tomorrow would you want to kill the excess livestock we produced that’s making all the extra methane?

[Anonymous No.12206027]

>>12205973
>vegetarians care about animals

[Anonymous No.12206032]

>>12206010
Dude, based argument man. You're right, it's very likely the entire population will stop eating meat on the drop of a pin, and this would leave us with millions of living animals leftover, which would need to be killed. Ergo, it is a grey issue and we should simply continue eating meat as we do. For animals will die either way, no? It's not like you've presented a non-possibility here and then pretended it to be realistic.

[Anonymous No.12206056]

>>12206032
>this hypothetical is extremely unlikely so I won't answer :^)
Vegecucks are truly stupider than cows. No wonder they empathize so deeply.

[Anonymous No.12206058]

>>12206010
I don't know how those tens of billions of animals would have to be handled if that happened, you'd probably have to kill and eat them anyway and just stop breeding them.

[Anonymous No.12206060]

>>12205973
The same goes for veganism/vegatarism, it’s never going to be adopted 100% (and doing so would be damaging to society on many levels). All we can do is control our own actions and imo for now selectively buying from local free range farms is the most “moral” since animals have a great life, you support local buisness, you keep free range farming an option and it’s healthiest option for you and your family. To properly satisfy this you still need to eat at sustainable levels.

I hope that in the future lab grown meat takes over the bulk of meat production, wiping out factory farming with free range kept for special occasions (and likely rich people).

[Anonymous No.12206105]

>>12206060
>I hope that in the future lab grown meat takes over the bulk of meat production
I hope so! Even if animal farming will never disappear completely, the fewer animals are handled the more likely they're treated respectfully. Though with the amount of Muslims around in the next generations all meat will be halal and the lab grown shit will never take root

[Anonymous No.12206108]

>>12206056
My answer to your "hypothetical" question, which you like the rest of the immoral knaves in this thread have used to continue coping with your lack of morality, is that instead of having the world go vegetarian at once, to offer a "last round" of meat-eating wherein every person of the world is aware that the meat they presently eat exists in a limited-window, and will be their last time consuming an animal's flesh. The slaughterhouses would cease new production, and would simply finish off the remaining animals they have, this being what the people would last eat. This is my answer.

Or, to use your example more directly, I'd let Burgers have one-final chance to eat meat (them only, since they are special from the rest of the world when it comes to their dietary habits), which would consist of those last, leftover animals that the other populations have now abstained from.

Hope this answers your copequestion.

[Anonymous No.12206123]

>>12205071
You're fucking retarded. How is vegetarianism favouring animals? Considering aricultural efficiency alone, reading livestock is terrible. It would be undoubtedly better for humans to become vegetarians. Do you just make up opinions with not even a speck of background knowledge?

[Anonymous No.12206134]

>>12206108
>hur dur I'm the only one who cares about animals
>let's slaughter millions of them but it's the last time, mum, I swear
>c-cope

[Anonymous No.12206137]

>>12205071
>The famine and human suffering across the world is tremendous
This is an argument in favor of vertical farming, not meat. Meat is incredibly wasteful in terms of resources.

[Anonymous No.12206143]

>>12206123
>Considering aricultural efficiency alone, reading livestock is terrible.
Cows alone provide several dozen industries with raw materials, humongous retard.

[Anonymous No.12206157]

>>12206134
Why do you care so much about that last batch of animals? If you quit eating meat in the last year or so, it's still your fault there would be 50+ billion animals alive with no environment to live in. Now eat them.
I stopped 6 years ago, no animal is alive right now to feed me.

[Anonymous No.12206162]

>>12206143
And of course it would be impossible to use synthetic or vegetable sources instead for those materials?

[Anonymous No.12206169]

>Why do you care so much about that last batch of animals?
I don't, I'm just highlighting the insincerity of your beliefs.

[Anonymous No.12206175]

>>12204013
How can killing animals have any magnitude of immorality that it will necessitate us giving up the numerous benefits of making the animal into a object of consumption? Considering the fact that animals cannot comprehend their mortality how is killing them reprehensible given it's quick?

[Anonymous No.12206177]

>>12206134
You're right, man. The scenario itself is extremely probable, in the first place. And secondly, if it does indeed happen, (since it's extremely realistic), instead of letting Burgers have their last bites, and cleaning our hands of animal-consumption for good, we should just continue the practise forever, since it's better to kill them indefinitely, than do so one final time and end it there. Infinite murder is equal to finite murder, man.

[Anonymous No.12206178]

>>12206162
Technically possible, economically unviable.

[Anonymous No.12206194]

>>12206169
Why are my beliefs insincere? I have to live with the fact that every single person around me eats meat and doesn't give a shit. I stopped arguing when they attacked me because it was pointless to argue (as proven in this thread). Just like I accept that wild nature in general is brutal and shitty. I just think that, as a human with empathy, I should do what I can to not create suffering. Where is the hypocrisy?

[Anonymous No.12206203]

>>12206178
Meat is too. It's heavily subsidized. And it's environmentally unviable.

[Anonymous No.12206208]

>>12206175
What makes you think they cannot comprehend their mortality? Do they flee from predators for fun, in your imagination? When cats, before death, leave their familiar spots and find a final shelter to die under, this is simply a coincidence of course? They didn't actually know they were going to die, because animal-expert anon here has peered into the minds of every animal in existence and determined with certainty that animals do not know of their own mortality.

Also, human infants cannot do the same, so if that's your only standard, there can be no reason why consuming human babies is wrong. So long as it's done "quick", of course.

[Anonymous No.12206218]

One thing I don't understand of meat eaters is that they believe vegetarians hold animals above all else. It's because humans are superior that we should hold this ethical shit into consideration.

[Anonymous No.12206238]

>>12206194
Because you keep trying to sit on two chairs where you first argue from suffering and when confronted with humane farming options you start to screech about murder. Not only that, but you also go on to support murder in a hypothetical where we won't need livestock anymore and won't be able to support it anymore. There are so many planes to your hypocrisy that it's mind-boggling, and it stems from the fact that you have absolutely no actual solid ethical foundation for this lifestyle choice of yours, but a collection of vaguely related soundbites, mottos and poorly defined "arguments" from some trendy numale 'zines. I can absolutely respect religious vegetarians or committed misanthropic treehuggers, but it's the onions-chugging faggots like you that just piss me off.

[Anonymous No.12206257]

>>12206238
He's being perfectly consistent, youre just looking for ways to weasel him into weird hypotheticals

[Anonymous No.12206264]

>>12206257
>no
Great post, dumb fag.

[Anonymous No.12206270]

>>12206208
>What makes you think they cannot comprehend their mortality?
By the fact they have no self-conscious. Clearly evident by their lack of deviating from their species norm of actions.
>Do they flee from predators for fun, in your imagination? When cats, before death, leave their familiar spots and find a final shelter to die under, this is simply a coincidence of course?
Perhaps you don't understand that animals are hardly different than plants as they are merely a byproduct of nature and only purpose is to keep the earth functioning. They don't flee to preserve their life because they have faculty to understand their death, more so they flee to continue their biological purpose.
>animal-expert anon here has peered into the minds of every animal in existence
I don't see why I would have to analyze every animal that has ever lived to come to a conclusion about their nature.
> human infants cannot do the same
My only concern is to preserve and improve humanity. There is no purpose in superfluously preserving other species as we are the only ones capable of removing ourselves from the terrestrial. But as long as you feel good about saving lives I don't suppose it matters that earth and everything on it will come to an end in a short time.

[Anonymous No.12206276]

>>12206264
youre the fag here, you dont even have it in you to be honest with yourself

[Anonymous No.12206282]

>>12206238
If I reasoned in absolutes you'd call me a mindless zealot. Meat consumption will never stop. It's impossible for me to hold the position you want me to hold, just so that I can check your imaginary boxes. Keep arguing about retarded hypothetical scenarios, the fact here is that I'm doing something and you're not, because as stated a million times in this thread already, you don't have any empathy and you don't care.but can't admit so.

[Anonymous No.12206287]

>>12206270
See >>12205659

[Anonymous No.12206311]

>>12206282
>If I reasoned in absolutes you'd call me a mindless zealot.
No. I'd call you a logically consistent person whose choice of ethical axioms differs from mine. Instead your just some enlightened fence-sitting quasi-practical fedoroid whose morality swings with the wind of zeitgeist.
>>12206276
>n-no you're just suppressing your guilt!!11
Yeah, yeah you posted it like 50 times in this thread, brainlet. I'm a bovine god, faggot, I giveth life, I taketh it away. Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.12206319]

>>12206282
>no empathy
>let’s eat the last round of animals
For “ethical” reasons

Choose

[Anonymous No.12206352]

>>12204927
Yep, those tomatoes imported from the Netherlands or strawberries from Spain with boats or aeroplanes sure do help the environment!

[Anonymous No.12206357]

>>12206319
See >>12206157

>>12206311
>le buzzwords spew
You don't even understand the reality you're in.

[Anonymous No.12206361]

>>12205112
Cuz its a fucking cow you eat it the same way the cow eats grass.

[Anonymous No.12206366]

>>12206270
An entire post, containing nothing but your own projections, passed off as fact. Arguments so egregious I am not sure I should even respond to them.

"Animals are hardly different from plants as they are merely a byproduct of nature and only purppose is to keep earth functioning" What am I supposed to even respond, to drivel like this? Do you think this statement is some objective truth? It's just your opinion, and one unsupported by any unbiased reasoning. "A byproduct of nature"? And what are humans, different? Are we not created from or a part of nature? All our basic behaviors are identical to that of animals, it's merely that we have a much greater complex of intelligence on top of it. But all animals, which we are part of, eat and drink and sleep and mate and do all other similar manners of things equally.

I gave you an example of cats, a house pet owned by humans, which do not live in the wild or have predators to flee from, as having a behavioral staple wherein they leave their owner and normal spots of living shortly before death, choosing to die in a secluded place, where their owners then find them. This single data-point heavily disproves anything you've said about them being ignorant to their mortality, and certainly has no relation to any vague "biological purpose" you mentioned.

[Anonymous No.12206368]

>>12206311
>I'm a bovine god, faggot, I giveth life, I taketh it away. Deal with it.
youre regressing to the state of mind of a small child

[Anonymous No.12206375]

>>12206319
Infinite murder is like, the same as finite murder, man. There's no real solution, it's all equally bad, so let me eat these cheeseburgers in peace, alright?

[Anonymous No.12206376]

ahhh i missed the best fucking thread. ill just say i think its fucking impossibble to deny that given the values most people have in the western world, veganism is easily morally superior. Only fucking retards with shitty strawmen and unscientific arguments would deny that.

[Anonymous No.12206382]

>>12206376
Show scientific arguments to prove your point.

[Anonymous No.12206397]

>>12206376
The best thread? More like the worst. These threads, whether here or anywhere else on the internet, always involve meat-eaters resorting to ridiculous levels of edge in order to rational-gymnastics themselves out of accepting their current lifestyles as less-conscious than existing alternatives out there. Nobody is even trying to shame anyone, but please, be honest about your moral principles and their relation to your lifestyle, instead of making every one of these discussions a pathetic display of how endlessly you'll cope to avoid simply admitting that there are morally superior lifestyles out there to the one you presently participate in. It's not even personal, and I have no problem admitting that my meat-eating past self was less-conscious than my current vegetarian one, and I'd say this even if I still ate meat. But others take it extremely personally, and so we get pitiful displays like those seen in this thread.

[Anonymous No.12206400]

>>12206357
>buzzwords
Do you even understand what that means, mad rebbitard?

[Anonymous No.12206403]

>>12206397
implying this thread was not highly entertaining

[Anonymous No.12206404]

>>12206352
>Doing more damage is just the same as doing less damage!

[Anonymous No.12206406]

>>12206404
What does this even mean?

[Anonymous No.12206414]

>>12206397
>vegetards get relentlessly btfo by straightforward logic as usual
>ree strawmen gymnastics mummy please say I'm morally supirior

[Anonymous No.12206418]

>>12206414
you guys have made complete fools out of yourselves actually

[Anonymous No.12206420]

>>12206406
Instead of lessening the causes of environmental destruction by whatever channels we can, let's just pretend that since there will always be some level of damage done, that it's equal either way!
Vegetards btfo!

[Anonymous No.12206422]

>>12204929
>being eaten by animals higher on the food chain
>It's not suffering brought on by the general malaise and nature of life.
Anon...

[Anonymous No.12206425]

>>12204212
>my preference hierarchy is better than yours

[Anonymous No.12206439]

>>12206420
You're not lessening environmental damage by eating vegetables only.

[Anonymous No.12206446]

>>12206422
We are moral beings. We can choose which aspects of nature we obey and represent.

[Anonymous No.12206447]

>>12206366
You need only observe how animals keep nature functioning and how plants also keep nature functioning to realize there is no fundamental difference. Such as bees pollinating plants and plants in turn producing seeds. Now tell me, is there a difference between these two species, fundamentally speaking?
>Do you think this statement is some objective truth?
It's open to debate, but it seems you're incapable of even that.
>It's just your opinion
As if anything you've stated in this thread weren't just opinions.
>And what are humans, different?
Yes, humans destroy nature to improve ourselves, I believe that is sufficient evidence to say we are in fact different. Origins do not matter in the least.
To address your house cat argument house cats were artificially evolved to the environment we placed them in. I don't know the purpose of their action of leaving their home but you are then jumping to the conclusion that they must be aware of their death even though those two things aren't even related in the least.

[Anonymous No.12206448]

>>12206420
>lessening the cause of environmental damage
I’ve got some bad news for you, friend

[Anonymous No.12206457]

>>12206448
Opposition to communism and lower class people is not that bad.

[Anonymous No.12206466]

>>12206422
So some nigger raping your granddaddy in the alley way is just the nature of life?

[Anonymous No.12206475]

>>12206400
You want me to hold a set of beliefs that will allow you to agree to disagree and dismiss me. You said you're fine with religious vegetarians. You accept them because they don't have arguments for you. But I did have arguments about this world, which is harsh and needs compromising and far sighted reasoning about things that are in constant change, and you just couldn't deal with that.

>>12206414
>vegetards get relentlessly btfo
not really, you lost on every angle

>>12206439
Much of agriculture is invested into animal farming for feed. Also a lot of water. Cutting off animal farming, you'd have to actually farm less vegetables.
Also vertical farming is a thing, and hopefully will explode soon. Google it.

[Anonymous No.12206479]

>>12206466
>presented with an argument
>resorts to autistic sperging and insults
Literally every vegecuck ITT.

[Anonymous No.12206489]

>>12205040
>because if they cared about the issues they profess they do they wouldn’t drive cars

Rather, they'd pack up and go live in a communal village in India where at least veganism as a lifestyle has more integrity and honesty. Simply living and enjoying all the fruits that the modern world has to offer and then denouncing X aspect with some moral vigour is just plain virtue signalling and arrogant when a real alternative exists but is ignored in doing the simple things. Many people don't even realise what sort of impact simply living as a first worlder has irrespective of how 'low key' they wish to be. Modern technology and the economy which creates it, sustains it, and develops it just does not go hand in hand with sustainability.

[Anonymous No.12206499]

>>12206475
>You want me to hold a set of beliefs that will allow you to agree to disagree and dismiss me.
I want you to have a well-founded set of intrinsically coherent consistent beliefs, you retarded fag. Instead it's just a salad of semi-digested buzzfeed articles and poorly thought out appeals to emotion.
>But I did have arguments about this world
You have literally none.

[Anonymous No.12206514]

>>12204013
No shit

[Anonymous No.12206515]

>>12206439
>>12206448
If you look into what industrial farmhousing of animals entails, you'll see that it is far, far worse for the environment than sustainably growing plantlife.

>>12206447
There's no point in discussing matters of nature and morality with someone who unironically believes "humans exist to be parasites to their host-planets", while "all the other animals are, like, natural, man". I won't discuss anything with someone whose perspective on the entirety of the human species and civilization consists of one so laughable. And your position was that animals do not know they are mortal, and I brought up that cats literally leave their home before death, dying somewhere other than where they normally live, away from their owner and their possessions. You mean to say that they don't know of themselves as mortal, but coincidentally and consistently perform this behavior just before their death? If they do know of their mortality, your position is therefore bunk, and I think the house cat-example is enough to show that.

Alright, I'm officially out. None of you are trying to be even remotely objective here, it's clear the issue tugs a nerve. Me and the others representing the vegetarian/vegan/anti-farmhouse cause in this thread have given you plenty of material to properly refute, which you have instead retorted to with reaction images and accompanying insults. I won't waste my time any further with people so dishonest. Be grateful others even spent time on types like you, despite your utter unwillingness to be sincere at all. Goodbye.

[Anonymous No.12206526]

>>12204716
>clown hives
describe a "clown hive"

[Anonymous No.12206527]

>>12206515
>I won't discuss things with you because I don't accept that humans are distinct from animals
>I won't waste my time any further with people so dishonest
So long, sub 20 IQ macaco.

[Anonymous No.12206529]

>>12206447

>there is no fundamental difference
absolutely retarded. plants are animals now. jesus.

>humans destroy nature
loads of fucking animals wipe out other species and destroy nature.

Dont see any of your random fucking points which are all based on arbitrary retarded distinctions.

>>12206479
Its nature no? animals do that shit all the time. its not good?

>>12206489
have you ever heard of buddhas middle way asshole? we arent superhumans. and its only virtue signalling because youre intimidated. why are you so resistant to wanting positive change. im gonna fuck off and be an ascete in india so i can runaway from where the real activism needs to happen? fuck you.

[Anonymous No.12206540]

>>12206499
and your beliefs and actions are totally coherent and consistent? youre not a sinner? you make me sick.

[Anonymous No.12206542]

>>12206489
"I happened to be born into a first-world country, and therefore standard of living. Rather than lessening what damage I can to the various sectors of the world, be it the environment, the welfare of animals, the child-labor source my shoes come from, and whatever else, I should instead do nothing at all. To even attempt to, would be virtue-signalling, and it is best therefore to live as unconsciously as possible."

[Anonymous No.12206548]

>>12206529
>we arent superhumans.
It doesn't take a superhuman to move to an Indian village. It takes very little from an average Westerner in fact.
>have you ever heard of buddhas middle way asshole?
Please, stop, namedropping things from your Westernized Buddhism poplit trash. Middle Way does not mean fence-sitting.
>the real activism
Kek. Well, at least you're honest about being a vain attention seeking faggot.

[Anonymous No.12206554]

>>12206529
>absolutely retarded. plants are animals now. jesus.
There is a difference, which is why I specified my argument with 'fundamental difference' which means that their reality is essentially equivalent.
>loads of fucking animals wipe out other species and destroy nature.
I'm going to need some sources on animals leveling entire environments. I'll wait.

[Anonymous No.12206604]

>>12206542
>I happened to be born into a first-world country, and therefore standard of living. Rather than following my supposedly deep moral convictions and using my privileged position to acquire and maximize relevant expertise and provide intensive qualitative innovations for the betterment of environment, I'm going to be an average faggot that causes as much environmental harm as a 100 third-worlders by merely participating in my native society AND I'm going to claim mind-blowing moral superiority by "saving" 20 cows through personal abstention.

[Anonymous No.12206614]

>>12206604
congratulations on iteration 200 of 'you still do bad stuff so there's no point in trying to not do other bad stuff'

[Anonymous No.12206639]

>>12206614
This lol, it's hopeless. Leave the thread, they're just operating on auto-pilot at this point. Nothing new left to be said.

[Anonymous No.12206658]

>>12206548
im not going to just invadr some poor indian village and take their resources. why dont you.

asshole im a real activist. i do more than you could dream. i make a difference and contribute. while you sit eating cheetos and jerk off wasting plastic bags for axphyxiation. look at yourself. and middle way isnt fence sitting. its thinking and being rational. not reductio ansurdem. you must have the iq of a 3 year old.

>>12206554
>reality is essentially equivalent
bullshit. define reality. you can define it many ways.

examples of animals levelling environments. loads. look at how sheep destroyed the lake district. and dont say thats a human thing. its incidental coz cows dont do that. look at how elk population fall in yellowstone is letting plants grow and fucking up the beavers. look at how grey squirrels fucked over and outcompeted red squirrels. look at how killer whale nursing communities destroy communities of sharks in the pacific. look at how parakeets are infesting london and outcompeting all the native birds. look at how domestic cats ravage native bird populations.

you dont know the fucking truth.
>>12206554
Youre more arrogant than ill ever be. im honest.

[Anonymous No.12206664]

>>12206614
Well yes, retard, if you claim to have strong ethical convictions, you would do well to follow up confronting things in a corresponding order of priority. Otherwise you're just a virtue-signaling hypocrite.

[Anonymous No.12206682]

>>12206658
>im not going to just invadr some poor indian village and take their resources.
Well, bring your own, obviously.
>i do more than you could dream. i make a difference and contribute.
You're a loudmouth wankstain that can barely form a coherent sentence in English and unironically responds to arguments with "define reality" (sic). The largest contribution to environment you could probably make is becoming an hero before your time.

[Anonymous No.12206687]

>>12206604
quite honestly answer this - how is someone supposed to do anything good without this kind of scrutiny. people pick and choose different things they care or are passionate about - and its impossible to try to be active in everything have an opinion about. people have limits on what they are willing to do. some people do a minimum, some people do loads and make real sacrifices - and even at that end, those people are still doing things whether they know it or not that has some bad implications or moral cons; unavoidable. i dont see the point in criticising people when they atleast do something. the way i see it, veganism is actually the easiest way that anyone can make a minimal good impact on the world for reasons which are important; environment for instance. Another is suffering. And whatever arguments against veganism you have i feel no one can deny that killing is bad and that if you dont need to, you shoulsnt unnecessarily add to someones suffering.

[Anonymous No.12206695]

>>12206664
>virtue-signaling
That’s not how you use that term, just FYI. Signalling behaviour is subconscious and takes place in social settings, it’s not stating your belief in something (genuine or otherwise.)

[Anonymous No.12206696]

>>12206687
No.

[Anonymous No.12206709]

>>12206664
progress would be far less efficient if everyone in the world did this. diversity of peoples causes and levels of commitment to them probably fosters a far more efficient manner of progress considering anything close to an ideal situation is economically, socially and personally untenable for most people and the world.

Consider this conversation about organizing charities for instance. A year for the hungry, year for the homeless? this type of prioritisation would cause havoc. Youll enjoy the video though. Very funny.

"Karl Pilkington on organizing charity"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8vN-O_rJI8

[Anonymous No.12206724]

>>12206696
We shall overcome my friend. :).

[Anonymous No.12206733]

>>12206687
>environment for instance
Positive environmental impact of veganism is questionable at best.
>Another is suffering
And in this case actual cause to rally for would be ethical humane farming
>no one can deny that killing is bad
Of course we can. We're slaughtering beings that we ourselves brought into existence. There's no valid moral counterpoint to ethical animal rearing and humane slaughter that doesn't in essence amount to anti-natalism, which is quite a peculiar position to hold to say the least.

[Anonymous No.12206758]

>>12204976
>>12205040
So if one is unable to be completely virtuous, virtue is useless and misguided? As someone who doesn't eat meat, doesn't drive, and attempts (as much as possible given my income) to not support large multinationals, I agree that the problems that you've outlined are real problems, but having an all-or-nothing approach to solving them will occlude the possibility of a solution. Constructing a harsh binary around these moral problems only increases the perceived distance between individual agency and the possibility of change.

One should work toward a life that makes it easier to live with themselves instead of forgoing the possibility of progress. I don't make any claims that any ecological crisis can be solved by individual diet, transportation, or consumption choices. But I am damn sure that the possibility of me making such a claim has a positive correlation to the amount of people that put in an attempt to solve these problems.

[Anonymous No.12206760]

>>12206709
>progress
So it's not about morality then. Ergo hypocrisy.
>ricky gervais show
Kek. Not surprised this is the level of your titanic intellect.

[Anonymous No.12206780]

>>12206758
>but having an all-or-nothing approach to solving them will occlude the possibility of a solution
It won't. The meat dilemma will be solved by industrial scale lab-growing of tissue and gentech this century, not by some faggots drinking quinoa smoothies.

[Anonymous No.12206783]

What sparked my interest in Veganism wasn't actually cows or pigs...it was lobsters. Have you ever seen how a seafood restaurant prepares lobster? It is barely even lobster by the time they are done. The lobster meat itself is bland and not even good which is why they dress it up with so much butter and spices and other bullshit. And the only reason we eat this fucking sea cockroach is out of boredom and a desire for variety. At least pig and beef taste good.

[Anonymous No.12206790]

>>12205684
Ants have long-lasting colonies that are culturally distinct from one-another. They have distinct mating, greeting, and eating rituals that can be used to distinguish them from other colonies. Some species are even capable of using resources such as tree sap to make medicines and anti-bacterial solutions when mixed with formic acid.

[Anonymous No.12206804]

>>12206780
Synthetic meat only solves the problem of animal suffering and factory farming, and only those if we assume that people will be okay with substituting a significant amount of their meat intake with the synthetic meat. The drawbacks of large-scale synthetic meat production are likely to be just as bad as any other large factory, so I'm not sure how that helps with any of the other problems.

[Anonymous No.12206816]

>>12206758
No, I agree with you that we should actively try to be virtuous and I’m also a strong believer in our autonomy as consumers and that the choices we make matter. I don’t really have a problem with people being vegan, but there’s so much misinformation about it that I belive most vegetarians are misguided into thinking this act is the one with the most consequence in their daily lives which is absolutely not true. I can think of many things: firstly not using water bottles is a huge one as that accounts for a huge amount of trash. You want to help animals? Stop drinking those. I never said an all out nothing approach was necessary again i’m Simply working with the framework of the argument vegans set themselves ie: they’re saving humanity, their impact is more than people doing other things that aren’t veganisn,
Etc etc

It creates a culture of narcissism that I think we can all agree is unhelpful and hypocritical at most. Vegans make themselves targets for criticism because of the bad faith arguments and fake science they push.

[Anonymous No.12206852]

>>12206733
>>environment for instance
>Positive environmental impact of veganism is questionable at best.
>>Another is suffering
>And in this case actual cause to rally for would be ethical humane farming

this is complicated. if environment is your only concern and eating meat is fine then whatever has the best evidence for sustainability. somenpeople just choose to eat less meat. Suffering on the otherhand. you could argue you dont want to condone animal farming at all because its killing still and you could view it as an unnecessary killing. you could argue that sustainable animal farming is still a small step that might better reflect realistic gradual change but then again killing could be seen as unacceptable regardless. We wouldnt allow the same for humans.

>>12206760
moral progress then... shouldnt have been hard for you to see that coming.
lol one show i like and youre creating insults.
youre not a very nice person. :(. Im sure you are in real life though. I bet you do like Karl Pilkington though.


>>12206780
you need to change peoples minds, not just create technologies. without changing peoples minds you wont change the markets for meat. and you do that by showing through the best example you can and talking.

[Anonymous No.12206889]

>>12206816
Yeah, you're absolutely correct. There is are a massive amount of maladaptive habits to which the western world has become accustomed. Ideas such as vegetarianism, which do have benefits in the abstract, get marketed by the media in order to open new markets for "vegetarian alternatives" so that people can purchase them and feel better about themselves. Most of the western world has a very polarized view of vegetarians for this reason, many of them are simply the people susceptible to the marketing and want to feel like a hero.

Vegetarianism or veganism is not a solution, especially if the energies of people who identify within that group are focused on polemics or creating "meat alternatives" that also produce tons of environmental waste. People should not exchange their moral sense for an identity.

And yeah, the western world's love affair with water bottles is absurd.

If you are the same anon that posted earlier, may I ask what model of capitalism you ascribe to? Or at least what your personal beliefs are in the topic? Mostly personal curiosity.

[Anonymous No.12206893]

>>12206816
I think it depends on why youre vegan. Some people dont really care about the environment and are just focused on people killing animals and animals status in connection to human society and so look only at farming, hunting, eating meat etc.
I think people naturally dont like and become confrontational with people, not just whos views are different but condemning others views. And when they talk about these conflicting views, it rubs people the wrong way and gets interpretted as people trying to show superior status.
And its not just vegans but also environmentalists who arent even vegetarian. LGBT. Even pro-life people and christians too. Exactly the same. Youd see christians on the street volunteering and people are like "look at that asshole".

Bad faith arguments?
No one desu who has any view, especially if extreme, is free from susceptibility to biases, cognitive shortcuts and simplifications or lay misunderstandings. Not even just for vegan fake science but science in general. Hypocrisy is in everyone.

Honestly as witj the examples above i think the perception of vegan arrogance is a natural product of fringe-mainstream conflict.

[Anonymous No.12206910]

>>12206889
>focused on polemics or creating "meat alternatives" that also produce tons of environmental waste
Again youre assuming this is their concern. I dont think it is. And i think its unfair to necessarily conflate them with environmentalism when a hell of alot of normal people dont put too much thought or effort into it. Vegans who are concerned mainly for animal welfare dont need to be called hypocrits for that. And also i think everyone has the right to express their beliefs in their behaviour without them having to choose to be activist. This is the case for many people in the mainstream too. If we are concerned with the wests maladaptive habits (which they are terribly) then we should look at people in general rather than just causing vegans hypocrits.

I also think "feeling better about themselves" is quite an unfair phrase and people generally dont support moral causes for that.

[Anonymous No.12206927]

>>12205112
Because...it's a human? Cannibalism is pretty gross man. If there was no more animals to eat in this world I sure as hell wouldn't start eating humans because I have empathy and distaste for eating other humans...it's just not correct culturally and it directly conflicts with how I am cognitively wired.

Look at it this way: Chicken tastes fucking delicious and isn't human - I don't know how human tastes but it's human and is fucked up to eat somebody of the same species

I'm sure it could be twisted in the past or future to justify cannibalism but uh...generally speaking? Humans like it when humans are alive. They don't like it when humans are actively killed...it's a sign of impending extinction.

[Anonymous No.12206929]

>>12206910
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I don't think it's a primary concern of those groups, but it is a by-product of them. I am also not calling vegans hypocrites generally, I have been a vegan for 4 years.

I am, however, very resistant to the idea that environmental and animal suffering concerns can be detached as cleanly as you want to believe. The damage that humans do to the environment harms animals, and I have only met one vegan or vegetarian who has attempted to detach these two concerns.

[Anonymous No.12206930]

>>12206790
They also seem to have brain parts analogous to all the major areas you find in mammal brains.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/340/6129/157/F2

[Anonymous No.12206955]

>>12206889
Yeah that was me posting, I’m not an economist so I can only make the most with what I’ve taught myself but that being said I feel like I should premise my explanation by the fact that I don’t care for economic dogmatists anymore than I do for any dogma. I see flaws in all the models but I do believe a mixed market capitalism affords the most safety,medicine, culture etc. I think the environmental effects of it are obvious and ideally I’d like less federal government programs and systems but common sense ones implemented right can in fact be helpful. Id love to see more checks on corporate influence and things like that but I’m skeptics of socialism but I can also see there’s an immediate need for some change. I won’t profess to know what that looks like or how to make it happen though. Completely agree with your post btw.

>>12206893
Yeah I agree with your analysis about people making these causes their identity and how transparent that is. This is a part of a larger conversation of society being pushed to nihilism. You’re absolutely correct in saying bias is everywhere, I’m sure in fact I hold some. Admitting this is the first step to being more enlightened, and I strongly belive that looking inward opposed to outwardly at the world with things like veganism
Or any other moral place holder is l largely unhelpful. I’m not opposed to religious people or vegans but their more egregious extremes which seem like a waste to me and quite frankly in bad taste.

[Anonymous No.12206958]

>>12205112
Darwinian Dominion is the only source I've seen try to argue against the "why not eat tards" rebuttal.
To paraphrase, the author basically says that humans are distinct because they are part of the social contract, whereas animals are not. If nothing else, even if a person is severely handicapped, their parents or those who care for them still formed a unique human bond with them, which shouldnt be discounted. If you just the tard, it would be unjust to the parent / loved one, who is a moral agent.
This isn't to say that animals therefore don't deserve a life free from unnecessary suffering, only that humans, tards included, should be given high card as it were to any animals in moral considerations.

[Anonymous No.12207002]

>>12206910
Not to break your balls bere because you’re being nice but it’s sort of naive to think people don’t do altruistic things to make themselves feel better. There really isn’t anything wrong with that as we’re social animals and protecting or helping people is probably an evolutionary perk of being a communal species.

[Anonymous No.12207029]

>>12206955
>Yeah that was me posting...

Thanks for explaining. I tend to lean further left in large part because of my concern for animals and the environment, but scepticism towards socialism is justified. Enjoyed reading your posts.

[Anonymous No.12207041]

>>12207029
Sail on my dude

[Anonymous No.12207081]

>>12204013
I was vegetarian for 30 years and I've come to believe the whole endeavor is both morally and practically a massive waste of time.

[Anonymous No.12207116]

>>12207081
That's a great point, but could I ask a question?

I can understand how vegetarianism could be seen as a waste of time morally, but how was it a waste of time practically? Vegetarian meals are faster to cook in my experience and sourcing the ingredients is just as easy as any omnivore diet.

[Anonymous No.12207124]

>>12204979
he's right, you know

[Anonymous No.12207182]

op here your sperging, shitposting and flaming in this thread has brought me much lulz thank you you brilliant retards

[Anonymous No.12207190]

>>12207116
Some things are not a matter of opinion but a matter of intelligence

[Anonymous No.12207205]

>>12206526
a seemingly uncountable wave of vehicles pours from inside a husk, each car filled with walking punchlines

[Anonymous No.12207215]

>>12206783
so you're saying you
> considered the lobster

[Anonymous No.12207380]

>>12206929
This is true, it is connected but then it is the same for other general moral issues e.g. environmental damage harms people i imagine which is a universal moral interest for almost everyone.

>>12207002
yes we do things as it makes us feel good but i wouldnt use that description for other peoples actions with their moral concerns. yes it makes us feel good to do certain things but we also do them as they are fundamentally core beliefs of right and wrong and i think thats the normal way we conceptualise peoples moral behaviour/motivations so i dont think its fair to use the good thing on one group specifically.

[Anonymous No.12207409]

>>12207190
Or perhaps a matter of taste...

[Anonymous No.12207421]

>>12207380
I guess that’s fair enough but you have to admit to yourself that there’s an aspect of that in there. I don’t think it’s conscious

[Anonymous No.12207435]

>>12207190
god what an asshole

[Anonymous No.12207447]

>>12207380
>it is the same for other general moral issues e.g. environmental damage harms people

I agree and would not attempt to decouple these concerns either. Oversimplification of these issues covers up important nuance, and often leads to the idea that one thing or one political stance is the solution. These problems are messy and interrelated with one-another, and unless we can deal with (or at least be aware of) both the symptoms and the causative agents, we're only going to have more complications in the future.

[Anonymous No.12207448]

>>12207421
yeah i think so and maybe some is conscious but i suspect it varies on the personality of the individuals as to why people become it or if they show off or all these other behaviours etc.

[Anonymous No.12207449]

>>12207435
It’s so good because it’s true

[Anonymous No.12207463]

>>12207449
Whats your IQ, conscientiousness and openness scores?

[Anonymous No.12207467]

>>12207463
Just high enough to get into your moms pussy

[Anonymous No.12207471]

>>12207467
Clearly a turbo manlet.

[Anonymous No.12207587]

>>12204212

a leftist would tell you you're evil because you aren't actively seeking to mold society under one rigid all-encompassing morality everyone would have to use

pic related for example, this scumfuck would tell you exactly that

[Anonymous No.12207610]

>>12204952
Also, I've some study a while ago about how plants experience physical pain

[Anonymous No.12207618]

>>12205051
I suffer due to direct actions of jews too. When is kike genocide coming?

[Anonymous No.12207751]

>>12204917

The inference holds in the case of humans, but no t for animals.

Read Peter Harrison

[Anonymous No.12207756]

>>12206515
>he thinks most plant based foods are sustainably grown
Toppest of keks anon

[Anonymous No.12207768]

>>12207751

Read this, vegan-cucks

https://ufile.io/0lt8l

[Anonymous No.12207803]

>We have no firm evidence as to why vegans are so annoying, only that they are and refuse to stop. We suspect it’s based on the fact that their diet lacks an essential nutrient that makes people tolerable, because vegans have personalities that even an animal couldn’t love.

[Anonymous No.12207807]

>>12207768

virus

[Anonymous No.12207809]

Paleo/keto is the dumbest shit ever and will make many people sick long term.

Humans are meant to be mainly vegetarian.

[Anonymous No.12207823]

>>12207809

paleo and keto allow vegetables though.

[Anonymous No.12207957]

>>12206397
Both sides are as bad as each other. I made several good points and got very little debate back. Vegans only argue with the hysteric people because it’s the only place their argument stands grounds.

For anyone willing, here are my points:
>factory farming is immoral, not rearing animals
>if birthing an animal into a world with any amount of suffering is immoral (even a loving local farm) then the same must apply to humans (antinatalism)
>Veganism is not without moral issues (enviromental concerns with transport and drought; humanitarian concerns (cashews, avocados, etc), health concerns (particularly with families as it is hard to get a balanced diet and meet requirements without supplements), economic factors (it would hurt 3rd world businesses and thus livelihoods) and potential mass extinction (if we were all to go vegan)).

[Anonymous No.12207982]

>>12207957
yes, this is an actually intelligent post in this stupid thread.

[Anonymous No.12207990]

>>12207957
Most retarded post in this thread

[Anonymous No.12208112]

>>12205702
Retarded people can feel pain and suffer dumb ass. They still react to basically all stimuli that a normal person would, just not necessarily in the same way.

[Anonymous No.12208122]

>>12204013
NO they aren't.

[Anonymous No.12208136]

>>12208112

Suffering requires reflexivity on emotions, which is something that animals and truly retarded people are unable to do. Pain without suffering is not worth as much.

''They still react to basically all stimuli''

It wouldn't be very hard to build a robot which would mimic the pain-behavior we observe in living things when we think they are feeling pain, and yet from this it would be clearly wrong to infer that the robot is feeling pain in any sense.

Hence why you need a secondary argument which states that because men and animals have similar neurophysiology, their internal states should be similar. Suffering is obviously an internal state.

Problem with this is that you don't have access to any being's internal state except yours. You can communicate your internal state with other humans through language, but you can't do this with animals. The neurophysiology of animals differs between species, but it doesn't differ nearly as much between humans because humans are part of the same species. Two ways, then, in which this inference is weakened. Additionally, some elements of human neurophysiolgy that we link to higher intellectual faculties and emotions are not present in other animals, which indicates that their experience of pain might be completely different from ours, or even absent.

This and more was all outlined in the link I posted, but you faggots can't be even be bothered to read a short essay.

[Anonymous No.12208377]

dairy production is even worse for animals than meat production

and I'd suggest only eating free range eggs if you give fuck all about chickens

t. omnivore

[Anonymous No.12208432]

>>12208136
>Suffering requires reflexivity on emotions
unfounded
one of the ironies of scientific research using animals is that for ethics, people are made to assume alot of the things you actually dismiss in this post like the extent of animal suffering, feeling pain and having consciousness.

>It wouldn't be very hard to build a robot which would mimic the pain-behavior we observe
just like robots people are made of physical components. hypothetically we could reconstruct a human like-for-like using different materials. If its functionally identical, is it still a copy.
you also ignore the fact that animal brains/nervous systems in general and especially mammals are incredibly similar to ours and still very complex and with many of the same corresponding regions. its unfair to compare it to a robot.

> You can communicate your internal state with other humans through language, but you can't do this with animals
we cant talk to animals but im pretty sure humans can infer animal mental states to an extent through their calls and body language. pet owners know this and if you work with animals you will have to know this in your job for the animals you take care of.

>are part of the same species.
so no priority in this statement

>Additionally, some elements of human neurophysiolgy that we link to higher intellectual faculties and emotions are not present in other animals, which indicates that their experience of pain might be completely different
their pain maybe different but i assure you most animals and all mammals have pretty much all the areas of the brain required for pain and emotion.

[Anonymous No.12208480]

>>12205730
/thread

[Anonymous No.12208530]

Killing is wrong. Therefore non vegetarianism is morally wrong. That's all there is to it.

[Anonymous No.12208567]

>>12208530
Why is killing animals wrong?

[Anonymous No.12208580]

>>12208567

Because killing is wrong

[Anonymous No.12208600]

>>12208580
Why is it wrong?

[Anonymous No.12208833]

>>12208136
If by retarded you mean a literal vegetable who can't operate in any way shape or form and is only being kept alive through an IV drip, then yeah fucking sure. But that's not what the word retarded means and no one thinks of a literal vegetable when they think of a retard.

Also what fucking link? There were no links posted before your post was made and its not like your using a username so how would anyone be able to tell it was your link and your argument?

[Anonymous No.12209205]

>>12206733
>>no one can deny that killing babies is bad

>Of course we can. We're slaughtering beings that we ourselves brought into existence. There's no valid moral counterpoint to ethical child rearing and humane slaughter that doesn't in essence amount to anti-natalism, which is quite a peculiar position to hold to say the least.

[Anonymous No.12209276]

>>12206733
this is stupid. saying its moral to kill animals is different from preserving a species.

[Anonymous No.12209679]

>>12204716
I live in the countriside and I and everyone I know is a hunter.
We will shoot your gay shit if you make any kind of move against hunting, vile creatures.