I have a feeling a technical discussion of ethics is not what most people came here for. Anyway, none of these answers commit you to any specific system of ethics, except perhaps the second option, which is fairly utilitarian in concept. If I were a Rawlsian, and thought that only rational beings could enter into the kind of contract necessary for morality, I could justify picking the first, third, or seventh option, for example. Though I am personally a utilitarian, so if you want a serious discussion of ethics, I can show you why utilitarianism isn't rubbish. Or try to, at any rate.Nifarious said:I think the curve starts changing when you start bringing in real money into the equation. 100; 1,000; 1,000,000...But it's these hamfisted hypotheticals that really ruin any serious conversation on ethics. Utilitarianism is such rubbish. Granted, you didn't invoke that in your answers, but that's what these hypotheticals aim to boil down to, no? At what point does your good outweigh another's good?
Well, there is no actual point to get at. The tension is always in flux, it's alive.
Anyway, if the poster, or anyone, has any real interest in the subject, get yourself to some Nietzsche, and then some Levinas...and chase that with some Bataille.
Because we are not hunters-gatherers anymore. We produce our food.falconsgyre said:Interesting. Why should it matter that an animal was bred for that purpose?Dana22 said:I dont mind eating any animal, if it was bred solely for that purpose. And no, I wouldn't kick neither puppy nor pig.
Sure, but I don't see how that's relevant. Why is killing a wild animal for food more wrong than killing a domesticated animal bred for it, all else being equal?Dana22 said:Because we are not hunters-gatherers anymore. We produce our food.falconsgyre said:Interesting. Why should it matter that an animal was bred for that purpose?Dana22 said:I dont mind eating any animal, if it was bred solely for that purpose. And no, I wouldn't kick neither puppy nor pig.
I never said its wrong. I said I wouldn't do that.falconsgyre said:Sure, but I don't see how that's relevant. Why is killing a wild animal for food more wrong than killing a domesticated animal bred for it, all else being equal?Dana22 said:Because we are not hunters-gatherers anymore. We produce our food.falconsgyre said:Interesting. Why should it matter that an animal was bred for that purpose?Dana22 said:I dont mind eating any animal, if it was bred solely for that purpose. And no, I wouldn't kick neither puppy nor pig.
As I read that my dog was right behind me...L3m0n_L1m3 said:Of course I would, because it's really a ZOMBIE PUPPY AND IT WANTS TO EAT YOUR BRAINS AND IT'S SITTING RIGHT BEHIND YOU BUT DON'T TURN AROUND BECAUSE THAT WOULD REALLY PISS IT OFF.
But no, I wouldn't kick a non-zombie puppy.
hypocritebrandon237 said:Hell no, and I would kick anyone who did kick the puppy, very hard. In the face. With boots on.
Animals feel pain too, and they are not as stupid as many people think they are, o kick it for $15 would just be insane and cruel.