How do you, as a meat-eater, justify the violence inherent in your food?

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

I don't have the patience to read through all eight pages but I'll explain my philosophy a about meat eating.

Eating meat is absolutely not morally wrong and to pick which creatures or class of creatures it is morally acceptable to eat will always be arbitrary. I don't see eating a cow as wrong and if some predator managed to catch me I wouldn't spend my last breaths decrying the injustice of being eaten.

 

[Truronian]

Rape is an evolutionarily advantageous method of passing on your genes.

No... If you want a woman to incubate your offspring four 9 months the last thing you want to do is harm her at conception (lest infection kill her before birth).

 

[Miles Teg]

This is one of the points where Christianity helps out. Namely God gave Humankind full stewardship of the earth. As I see it we can do what we want with the critters, provided we aren't unnecessarily cruel.

 

[LucyDuke]

Instincts actually require a nervous system.

A nervous system is a system of chemical reactions.

So what's the difference, again?

 

[Xanikk999]

A nervous system is a system of chemical reactions.

So what's the difference, again?

Its more complex.

At the plant level its simple and does not require any thought or actions on part of the plant.

Its completely automatic in otherwords. No thought process is capable in plants, so thats why.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

As a vegetarian I have several reaosns why I don't eat meat, and one of the main ones is that as I can survive fine without doing (i.e. it is not nessacary) then I should live and let live.

I could survive without having sex, but I'm still going to screw.

As for nutrition, it is a lot harder to survive without at least some animal products in the diet. Animal products provide more calories per gram than plant because humans do not digest cellulose like cows or elephants. Also, essential vitamins and amino acids are a lot harder to come by in plants.

Plants also don't think or walk or run or have emotions like animals do.

Their death is still violent when you eat them. It just doesn't matter as much to you because you don't value them the same way as animals. Not that I find anything wrong with that, but don't go accusing us carnivores of being more violent than anyone else.

 

[aneeshm]

Is anyone here denying that there exists a fundamental difference between plants and animals? Just curious.

 

[Truronian]

Is anyone here denying that there exists a fundamental difference between plants and animals? Just curious.

What do you mean by fundemental? Obviously great differences exist, else they would not belong to different kingdoms.

 

[Perfection]

Is anyone here denying that there exists a fundamental difference between plants and animals? Just curious.

Fundamental difference in what sense?

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Is anyone here denying that there exists a fundamental difference between plants and animals? Just curious.

No plants, unlike animals, have things like chlorophyll and cell walls. But when you get right down to it, were all eukaryotes.

 

[LucyDuke]

At the plant level its simple and does not require any thought or actions on part of the plant.

Your instinct requires thought and action? Mine doesn't.

[Plants'] death is still violent when you eat them. It just doesn't matter as much to you because you don't value them the same way as animals. Not that I find anything wrong with that, but don't go accusing us carnivores of being more violent than anyone else.

This is like what I was talking about. Perfectly valid argument, and completely ridiculous to boot.

 

[Atlas14]

Your instinct requires thought and action? Mine doesn't.

Plants do not typically exceed the pure instinct/respond to stimuli mark. We humans can and do.

 

[Che Guava]

Is anyone here denying that there exists a fundamental difference between plants and animals? Just curious.

No, but do you deny that there exists a fundemental difference between animals and humans? For that matter, where does the distinction between animals and other life end? As a vegetarian, do you avoid breads and beer because of the millions of yeast (also classified as animals) that die as a result?

 

[Gladi]

This is like what I was talking about. Perfectly valid argument, and completely ridiculous to boot.

Yep, shows them vegetarians.

Aneeshm, I will ask once again. WHAT is wrong with eating meat, that people have to justify it?

 

[aneeshm]

No, but do you deny that there exists a fundemental difference between animals and humans? For that matter, where does the distinction between animals and other life end? As a vegetarian, do you avoid breads and beer because of the millions of yeast (also classified as animals) that die as a result?

Aren't yeasts fungi?

 

[Bill3000]

This is like what I was talking about. Perfectly valid argument, and completely ridiculous to boot.

Of course it's a ridiculous argument - it's meant to be. A Reductio ad absurdum is meant to show that the other side's reasoning is ridiculous by claiming it to be true for the sake of an argument. In this case, it quite clearly debunks the claim, that violence is a good reason in itself to oppose meat eating.

And in this case, it's probably his only actual argument - that violence is inherintly negative and that it is a good justification for this moral belief, as opposed to a preference of taste.

 

[LucyDuke]

Plants do not typically exceed the pure instinct/respond to stimuli mark. We humans can and do.

You're right, Atlas, but that's not what I'm getting at.

But plants dont get excited, they react to light and thats about the only time they lean towards anything. I forgot what the term for this was called.

Some other plants can react to pressure and weight, like the venus fly trap.
But it is just a chemical reaction, not instinct or feelings.

 

[aneeshm]

Yep, shows them vegetarians.

Aneeshm, I will ask once again. WHAT is wrong with eating meat, that people have to justify it?

They don't have to justify the act of eating meat itself, they have to justify their reason for inflicting violence.



Anyway - now do you know how the shoe feels on the other foot? It is vegetarians who are constantly asked to justify their lifestyle and dietary choices. I now challenged meat eaters to do the same, to justify the use of violence which is inherent in obtaining their food.

 

[Che Guava]

Aren't yeasts fungi?

There's some debate on that point. But that's besides the point....

 

[Mise]

Once upon a time I realised that I couldn't justify eating meat. I became a vegetarian for 4 years.

Eventually I realised that I didn't have to justify it, and just ate it.