I agree with
when it comes to consciousness being present across all biological life. The alternative is to conceive of identical behaviour having two different types of explanation: one motivated by feeling and sentience in general - curiosity, playfulness, determination, personality, etc - and the other - despite having the
identical appearance of being so motivated -
in fact being merely programmed to appear as such. There seems to me to be no good justification for positing these two different explanations. The simpler explanation is the better one.
I also disagree with the idea that some life forms have "lesser" consciousness compared to others: although there are undoubtedly different conscious capacities between different organisms, I see no reason - assuming the universal existence of consciousness across all life in the first place - to then posit that the degree of raw consciousness - intensity of awareness itself - varies significantly across life forms.
Various supposed justifications have also been expressed in this thread so far for eating meat. They seem to me instead to be rationalisations. Considering them one by one:
- Meat is generally not necessary for health. There are millions of us around the world who do not eat any animal products whatsoever and who do just fine on that diet. I say "generally" only because one occasionally encounters those - and perhaps is one - who claim to genuinely have some sort of health problem that only resolves when dropping a plant-based diet. I am skeptical that solutions cannot be found in all such cases where there is a genuine commitment to finding them, with, if necessary, the assistance of a similarly-committed plant-based dietitian, and possibly other similarly-committed health-care professionals, such as one's general practitioner. Because I can't rule it out, though, I have left in the qualifier.
- "I very much like it" is pretty much the epitome of an unsound justification for behaviour that one otherwise recognises as immoral.
- While - given that I agree that plants are sentient - I sympathise with the sentiment behind "I would rather eat dead meat then live plants", the problems with acting on this sentiment are that:
- As points out, the farming of animals generally entails far more cruelty and suffering than the farming of plants.
- It is questionable anyway that a plant continues to be sentient for long after being cut down and pulled from the earth, or at least that it remains sentient by the time it reaches our plates (although this point does not ultimately hold: see immediately below).
- Most importantly, one anyway need not eat plants: one can instead eat their produce (fruit, fruit-like vegetables, seeds, nuts, legumes, etc). It is unlikely that these are sentient in the same way that plants are, and, in the case of fruit and fruit-like vegetables, it is unlikely even if they are that death by being eaten while fresh is any worse than dying a slow death by decay, which is their otherwise fate, whether they are harvested by humans or not. One can also apply this reasoning to the point immediately above: even if a plant as such (in contrast with its produce) remains sentient by the time it gets to our plates, it is unlikely that its death by being eaten while fresh is any worse than dying a slow death by decay. Of course, the problem with that application of this reasoning is that, often, this is not otherwise its fate: we need not cut down plants for food in the first place given that we can instead eat their produce, and they would otherwise often live a long(er) life. This is why the previous point does not ultimately hold. The "eat only the produce of plants" approach is the approach that I take, and advocate for on an ethical basis.
- "But they're free to roam" (paraphrased) is problematic for two reasons:
- Most farmed animals in the modern world are not free to roam (and often are confined in extreme conditions).
- More generally: this is their natural right, and granting a being his/her natural right does not grant the benefactor a right to then abrogate other of that being's natural rights, namely, to be free from avoidable harm, especially death (by killing), and to be treated as an end rather than a means, and especially not to be treated as property and commodified.
- That we couldn't farm without animal dung is false: stock-free farming is a known and viable practice.
Blessing food or butchers is, it seems to me, motivated by noble sentiments, but it does not justify avoidable harm.
A few other specific responses:
(2024-07-14, 03:58 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]Presumably wild predator animals' apparently cruel killing of other animals for food constitute a much reduced or nonexistent moral dilemma, since being animals they do not enjoy having spiritual/moral principles to contend with - they simply do not and cannot know any better - their predatory behavior is hardwired into them so to speak.
The problem is not that they don't know any better, but that they generally have no other option (lest they starve to death): mostly, they are either obligate carnivores or omnivores with limited access to plant-based foods such that they need to supplement by killing.
We have options that they don't have.
(2024-07-16, 10:19 AM)David001 Wrote: [ -> ]Some zealots would indeed like us to eat a "plant based diet"
Just like, a while ago, some zealots liked for us to engage labour only voluntarily. We all know, though, that slavery is necessary for the health of society, industry, the economy, and the family, don't we? Aren't zealots so silly?
(2024-07-16, 10:19 AM)David001 Wrote: [ -> ]and if they got their way, we would all end up eating a very artificial, and probably unhealthy diet
A wholefood diet consisting in fresh fruit, vegetables, nuts, seeds, and legumes is artificial and probably unhealthy? That's a bizarre sentiment from my perspective.
That's the diet I mostly eat, it's the diet that in my experience most informed vegans would recommend even if (as I do) they sometimes non-ideally eat a little junk food, and in my experience it's the exact opposite of artificial and unhealthy.
(2024-07-16, 03:10 PM)David001 Wrote: [ -> ]I have always had an exrtgemely strong dislike of seeing food wantonly wasted.
Likewise. I very, very rarely waste food, and it's always accidental when I do: either forgetting that I need to use an item prior to its expiry, or mistakenly buying an item that includes animal products with the store refusing to take it back.