What are you thoughts about Vegetarianism and why do you feel that way?

Xangi

New member
Mar 4, 2009
136
0
0
peruvianskys said:
disingenuous
I don't think that means what you think it means.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=disingenuous

Also, the ability to feel pain does not equal self awareness. Pain is quite the abstract concept, and in reality only serves one simple purpose: To prevent an organism from sustaining damage to itself.

Hell, I'm an amatuer game programmer, and my NPCs feel "pain". When they take damage of any kind, they react defensively in order to not take any more damage. Is it cruel to then destroy them? No, they are not aware of their own existence. They are merely lines of code with an image assigned to them which represents an obstacle of some description.

In a similar way, it is not cruel to kill an entity that is not aware of itself. If I kill a mouse, and it feels pain while I kill it, does it understand the pain it feels? No, it is a mouse. It is a simple organism whose brain only serves the utilitarian purpose of allowing it to control its limbs in order to lead it to food and a mate, which will allow the species to continue. If I kill a cow, is that cruel? In a way the cow is even less aware than the mouse. It has been bred by humans for so long it practically lacks a survival instinct, and its only purpose in existing is not, in fact, to continue its species by reproduction; but to continue it by being eaten, which will give incentive to humans to breed more of its species. This is the truth of the matter, expressed in the plainest of terms.



Also, morality is purely subjective. I shouldn't have to tell you this, but I will anyway. If there were no humans or other capable sentient beings, there would be no morality, therefor morality is a construct of sentience. You control your own morality, you produce it. Others also produce their own moralities as well, and while you may try to influence them by expressing yours, forcing your own morality on someone else is both nonproductive and doomed to fail. Only you can choose your morality, though there are often better choices than others.





OT: Well, look above. I don't really care, and I can even empathize if a person truly dislikes the taste or texture of meat, or if their vegetarianism is for medical reasons. However, people like manic_depressive13 annoy me to no end. Though I'm about 90% sure he's trolling, but if he wasn't, he'd really piss me off.
 

peruvianskys

New member
Jun 8, 2011
577
0
0
Xangi said:
peruvianskys said:
disingenuous
I don't think that means what you think it means.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=disingenuous
His argument was insincere and intentionally misleading. That's what disingenuous means. Now can we move on?

Also, the ability to feel pain does not equal self awareness. Pain is quite the abstract concept, and in reality only serves one simple purpose: To prevent an organism from sustaining damage to itself.

Hell, I'm an amatuer game programmer, and my NPCs feel "pain". When they take damage of any kind, they react defensively in order to not take any more damage. Is it cruel to then destroy them? No, they are not aware of their own existence. They are merely lines of code with an image assigned to them which represents an obstacle of some description.

In a similar way, it is not cruel to kill an entity that is not aware of itself. If I kill a mouse, and it feels pain while I kill it, does it understand the pain it feels? No, it is a mouse. It is a simple organism whose brain only serves the utilitarian purpose of allowing it to control its limbs in order to lead it to food and a mate, which will allow the species to continue. If I kill a cow, is that cruel? In a way the cow is even less aware than the mouse. It has been bred by humans for so long it practically lacks a survival instinct, and its only purpose in existing is not, in fact, to continue its species by reproduction; but to continue it by being eaten, which will give incentive to humans to breed more of its species. This is the truth of the matter, expressed in the plainest of terms.
I agree that eating, say, a mollusk is probably not considered cruel because the mollusk lacks any form of awareness, but why are you so sure that cows or sheep or pigs don't suffer the way we do? You're just assuming so in order to defend your lifestyle; there is no biological reason to believe that animals we slaughter for meat and use for dairy don't have self-awareness. Pigs and cows (and tons of other animals) both past the dot test, where an animal will be placed in front a mirror with a small dot of ink on its forehead and, upon seeing the dot in the mirror, attempt to remove it from their own forehead. This is great evidence that the pig understands itself in terms of an entity.



Also, morality is purely subjective. I shouldn't have to tell you this, but I will anyway. If there were no humans or other capable sentient beings, there would be no morality, therefor morality is a construct of sentience. You control your own morality, you produce it. Others also produce their own moralities as well, and while you may try to influence them by expressing yours, forcing your own morality on someone else is both nonproductive and doomed to fail. Only you can choose your morality, though there are often better choices than others.
I'm not forcing my own morality on anyone - I don't want to legally mandate vegetarianism or outlaw keeping pets. What I'm trying to do is show people that the consumption of meat violates the morals they already have, once you get past the knee-jerk apologetics of meat eaters. You can claim moral nihilism all you like, but when it comes down to it, a reasoned examination of the scientific evidence shows that the consumption of meat violates the moral precepts against harming and destroying and causing suffering that almost every human being already has. It's not about making a new moral system, but taking the one that we already have to its logical and scientific conclusion.
 

rutger5000

New member
Oct 19, 2010
1,052
0
0
Elmoth said:
There is no such thing as a vegetarian.

There's more products made from animals than just meat:
Medicine, chewing gum, anti aging cream, pasta, imitation eggs, cake mixes, dyes and inks, adhesives, minerals, plastics, pet food, plant food, photo film, shampoo and conditioner.

I could go on and on.

I think it's a little hypocrite to not eat meat, but use all these other things fine because they don't remind of you of that cute little animal.
No offense, but people like you always bug me. You're not being smart using this argument, you're being obnoxious. The argument has been made millions of time, and the argument against it has always be the same:
Hey we can at least try can we? Not being a vegetarian because it's hypocritical to be one, is the same argument not to give to charity. If you give say 20 dollars to any random charity chance are the problem still isn't fixed, while you could very well put more effort into it.
Also it's strange to say there is no such thing as a vegetarian because it's hypocritical to be one.
Also I'm a vegetarian and I'm in no way hypocritical about animal well being. I do it because of the health and environmental issues the modern bio-industry brings.
 

rutger5000

New member
Oct 19, 2010
1,052
0
0
manic_depressive13 said:
I am a vegetarian. I could argue how eating meat is unsustainable, drastically detrimental to the environment and causes health problems due to the western world's tendency for over-consumption. I could also refute every single argument you have about whatever necessity or justification you feel you have for eating meat. But and the end of the day I don't give a fuck about my health or the environment or even morality. I just know that I feel sick when I see animals suffering or being killed when I know it isn't necessary. Also at the end of the day, most arguments in favour of eating meat are "I like the taste and I don't give a fuck about anything else." That's perfectly valid. I'll still hate you for it, and probably wouldn't even call an ambulance for you when you have a cholesterol induced heart attack, or choke on your steak. Just saiyan.
Bravo, I can say little else. Your opinion is perfectly under built.
 

Aurora Firestorm

New member
May 1, 2008
692
0
0
I don't mind vegetarians.

What I mind are vegetarians with attitude.

You never see meat-eating types slapping posters up on every available surface that are all, "YOU SHOULD SAVE THE CUTE ANIMALS! LOOK AT THIS ANIMAL AND HOW CUTE IT IS! WOULD YOU EAT THAT?" I'm pretty sure we'd get attacked for being total assholes, if we did. Yes, you ridiculous vegetarian evangelists, I would eat that kitten. I would eat your dog, your horse, and your adorable little guinea pig. I love meat, and I don't care what it comes from (humans aside), I will try it at least once. I will certainly allow you every right to slaughter and eat any kind of animal you want. I have shot a squirrel through the heart before. Does that freak you out? How *adorable.*

The main objection I have to vegetarians is when they do it for "moral reasons." That's pretty much implying that everyone else is immoral, whether they say it or not. If someone doesn't like the taste of meat, I don't mind at all. I hate the taste of green veggies (seriously, I do, they make me retch, and I would eat them if I wouldn't, say, throw up). I'll go to the restaurant and order roast chicken, and you'll get your baked eggplant, and we'll all be happy.

Why is it that people can accept others' religions, philosophies, and favorite colors, but not what food they eat? Seriously, guys, this isn't the end of the world.

There you go. Now leave me alone to go eat my slab of beef.



Re: all the arguments against eating meat, here is my reason I don't care.

"Also at the end of the day, most arguments in favour of eating meat are "I like the taste and I don't give a fuck about anything else.""

But hey, there's more:

"Technology will one day make all the disadvantages of eating meat obsolete, because one day we'll raise meat in a vat, and then you guys can all shut up about this."

Also, "I hate green things, because they make me want to barf, and many other veggies do also, and if I didn't eat meat, I'd probably be eating nothing that is particularly filling except beans. Carbs are going to turn me into a sugar-filled diabetic marshmallow, so I'm pretty much resigned to lots of meat and beans."
 

Xangi

New member
Mar 4, 2009
136
0
0
The argument was not intentionally misleading, it simply did not conform to your views.

peruvianskys said:
Pigs and cows (and tons of other animals) both past the dot test, where an animal will be placed in front a mirror with a small dot of ink on its forehead and, upon seeing the dot in the mirror, attempt to remove it from their own forehead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test

5 seconds on google says they don't, at least not in the way you think.

Also, saying that to defend my lifestyle? You act as though it needs defending. No, I do not assume anything, I take what evidence has been found and apply it (which is the definition of scientific by the way, which is a word you misused quite blatantly).

You are not trying to "show people that they are violating their morals", you are trying to alter their morals to be like your own under the guise of "revealing their own immoral actions". I do not claim moral nihilism, if you knew what that meant you wouldn't accuse me of it. But clearly you are incapable of accepting an argument that is counter to your own, or even a simple explanation of why your own argument is flawed by its very nature, which is what my original post was.


Also, as an afterthought, "knee-jerk apologetics of meat eaters"? Seriously? You say that with such distaste but fail to recognize that YOU ARE IN FACT THE SAME THING! You are simply on the other side of the argument.

EDIT: Actually it was more like 3 seconds.