• AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder, and you said it again just now. Why does killing an animal for food carry any moral weight? Cheetahs don’t get any flak for hunting caribou.

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      A human is an animal too, so i might kill it for food with no moral weight to it. Great.

      But if you compare yourself to a cheetah, I get that your intellect and morals are just… Primal 😁

        • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I actually didn’t say anything and just followed this dude’s logic. But actually I’d say it’s not equivalent. The non-human animals are always innocent. Man is rarely.

          • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Oh, I disagree. Ant colonies go to war with each other all the time. Basically all mammal species see every male in a 5-mile radius fight to the death over a single female. I’m curious what exactly it is the animals are supposed to be innocent of.

            • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              They don’t act on intellect. They just do without knowing what they’re actually do. If a dog kicks over your vase, do you see malignant intent? Is the ant-colony going to war for survival acting on greed or lust or the desire to spill blood?

              Do they rape because they despise women? Do they kill because they love the control? Do they build political systems made to opress the dumb and/or weak? Do they actually have crab-mentality like we do? Do they actually destroy the planet for their own desires to own as much stuff as possible?

              I probably could go on for ages but you get the picture. We do most things while knowing better. We do horrible things, even though we know what others feel. We do most things with intent and knowledge.

              We might be innocent as long as we’re a toddler crawling around the world, knowing nothing. But now we buy cheap shit made in china, knowing very well that we keep horrible slavery running this way. We know and we ignore. Examples are legion, but you live on this planet too, so you know.

                • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I don’t need an excuse for that. It’s evidently visible all around us. Alternative? To what? To humans? Nature will sort that problem out.

    • Strawberry
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder

      I didn’t, actually

      and you said it again just now

      I didn’t, actually

      Why does killing an animal for food carry any moral weight?

      Because humans aren’t special unique beings with souls that make us the only ones with moral worth. Many animals are capable of suffering and emotion.

      Cheetahs don’t get any flak for hunting caribou.

      We are the ones with the social system allowing for moral frameworks to guide our decisionmaking. Cheetahs aren’t moral agents. And if they are, they follow cheetah morality. Plus, they are obligate carnivores anyway (which is why your cat should not be deprived of meat)

      • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder

        I didn’t, actually

        Yes you did, that’s what the word “murder” means

        your cat shouldn’t be deprived of meat

        All right then. Do you believe that owning a cat is immoral, since in order for the cat to thrive, creatures with souls must die?

        • Strawberry
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          There are no creatures with souls. But no, I wouldn’t say keeping a cat in general is immoral. There are definitely ethical concerns around things like kitten breeding mills and letting cats roam around outdoors, though

            • Strawberry
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              We are the ones with the social system allowing for moral frameworks to guide our decisionmaking. Cheetahs aren’t moral agents … Plus, they are obligate carnivores anyway (which is why your cat should not be deprived of meat)

              please act in good faith or let me know that you’re not interested in doing so

              • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Why is me killing a chicken to feed to my cat morally acceptable, but me killing a chicken to feed to myself is not? In both cases the one with the moral code is doing the killing.

                Do you believe that if there were a race of intelligent aliens who were obligate carnivores, they should be allowed to slaughter humans for food? It sounds like you think the answer is yes. I would agree, provided the humans were treated humanely.

                • Strawberry
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  If you’ve taken in a cat you have committed yourself to its care. It’s not a matter of the moral agent being a killer as the combination of being a moral agent and not an obligate carnivore. You can choose not to consume animals because you don’t need to. If you choose for your cat to not consume animals, you are killing the cat. But this is not a huge factor in the real world when it comes to the meat industry. Cat food is not nearly its main driver.

                  As for your alien hypothetical: Whether they should be “allowed” is kind of an unclear question. Who is allowing or disallowing this action? I think humans would be justified in fighting back to prevent our own demise. I think it would be ethical on the part of the aliens to strive towards a solution for their diet that doesn’t involve killing or harming sentient beings

                  • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    But this is not a huge factor in the real world when it comes to the meat industry. Cat food is not nearly its main driver.

                    So it’s just a matter of degree? Meat could be a delicacy for humans as long as we weren’t overconsuming?

                    I think it would be ethical on the part of the aliens to strive towards a solution for their diet that doesn’t involve killing or harming sentient beings

                    If they’re obligate carnivores, what could they eat instead, if killing any living creature for food is morally equivalent?