maniakes: Don't eat what you won't kill?

maniakes (

maniakes) wrote,
@ 2008-05-08 11:24:00

Don't eat what you won't kill?
http://www.deanesmay.com/2008/05/08/dont-eat-what-you-wont-kill/

(Post a new comment)

flawlessnight
2008-05-08 07:29 pm UTC (link)

I can see the author's point, but at the same time...I don't have to kill anything myself. Whole industries exist so that I don't have to deal with it. (corrupt, immoral industries, but that's another debate) And I'm perfectly happy to take advantage of a public garbage service while not even considering the possibility of working in garbage disposal myself. My objection to porn (most porn) is that it's gross, and the fact that I couldn't be a sex worker myself isn't relevant.

I guess I just used a categorical imperative argument...and I hate Kant. Um. Maybe I can fix it by saying I feel no need to personalize anything in that manner. Yeah. :)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

maniakes
2008-05-08 07:35 pm UTC (link)

I think the question comes down to the distinction between "immoral" and "gross". The author would feel he'd done something immoral if he personally killed a cow for any reason other than an immediate choice between cowicide and starvation, and hiring out the act doesn't remove the immorality. I'm with you on this issue, and for you and me killing animals for food is merely gross, and 'gross' is an out-of-sight/out-of-mind thing.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

flawlessnight
2008-05-08 07:46 pm UTC (link)

I would find it heart-wrenching, especially because cows have such expressive eyes. But I hesitate to equate that with morality, because I think morality should have a philosophical consistency to it, although I guess I'd also be wary of a philosophically consistent morality that diverged from that heart-wrenching feeling...oh well. I have to get pretty worked up before I'd be ready to kill without feeling that, and animals like cows just don't bring me to that place.

I do think that killing is really only ever okay for reasons specific to the person being killed. Like, the death penalty. Or revenge. Or in the act of protecting someone else. I believe cops have the right to kill in the line of duty, although I think they exercise that right too readily in the majority of cases, and I think the inquiry surrounding such things should be rigorous to the point of insanity.

But the fact that I wouldn't execute someone myself (unless their crime affected me personally, or was one of the few crimes that ALWAYS get me angry, which basically includes rape) doesn't mean that they shouldn't die.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	flawlessnight 2008-05-08 07:47 pm UTC (link)
	Woo, I hope you can decipher that. I'm a little sick right now, and not really coherent. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	maniakes 2008-05-08 07:54 pm UTC (link)
	I think I understand what you're saying. It sounds reasonable, and I agree with most of it. (Reply to this)(Parent)

herufeanor
2008-05-08 08:21 pm UTC (link)

I'm with you on this. I think I would find it kind of gut-wrenching to kill a cow myself, or a lamb, or even a chicken. However, that doesn't mean I believe it's all that unethical. A little unethical, because one of the basic ethic precepts I hold to is "life is good". However, I also hold to the precept that the value of life is proportional to the intelligence of that life. Without that qualification, killing a plant would be unethical as well, and we'd be stuck eating salt and scavenging already-dead stuff..

Of course, some people see a hard threshold between things with no minds (i.e. plants, bacteria, etc.) and things with any kind of mind, no matter how simple (that is to say, anything with a central nervous system). However, I refuse to proscribe to a viewpoint which places the same value on the life of a gnat as on my own, just because a gnat also has a central nervous system. The value, therefore, must be gradiented, rather then relying on a hard threshold.

The problem I have with the heart-wrenching feeling

flawlessnight mentions is that this feeling is directly proportional to cuteness. Cuteness is just an instinct to keep us from killing out own babies, and beyond being an attribute of young humans, has very little do with intelligence, or any other value you could assign to a lifeform which actually reflects the ethics of killing it.

(Unless you hold to a system of ethics which has as a base precept "beauty is good", though that could lead to some really creepy conclusions whereby the best course would be to kill, stuff and mount the babies in ridiculously cute poses. I do not like this system of ethics.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Mini Sitemap:

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…