6 ms·

"Perceived meat entitlement"? Can't imagine why you find people getting defensive.

by gozur88 10y ago

tluyben2 10y ago
Not to me... Waiters to people and people to waiters, people at people at parties etc. What would you call it though? This thread is about killing life because rich folks want meat? If that is assumed true, then is that not a feeling of entitlement people have for some reason?
- gozur88 10y ago
  I suspect the problem is people are unhappy with your assumption of the entitlement to tell them what they ought to be eating.
  - tluyben2 10y ago
    I am not telling anyone what to eat or not... I was just commenting that guys get very wound up by touching on the subject. This thread does not point the other way now does it?
    - gozur88 10y ago
      That's pretty disingenuous. "Touching the subject" of restricting what other people eat naturally will make them angry. Particularly the way you do it.
      - tluyben2 10y ago
        English is not my first language; what did I exactly say 'that way'? As I am not sure: by people (guys) getting angry I mean things like blokes shouting at a Thai waiter because they wanted "f*cking serious meat" and there was hardly any in the soup.
  - erikpukinskis 10y ago
    Yah, it's interesting how people who believe they are entitled to things get offended when someone describes them has having entitlement. The argument is something like "don't call me entitled I'm entitled to eat as much meat as I want" ... which makes no sense to me.
    - GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
      Well, you're entitled to eat whatever you can afford to eat. If that's meat, it's meat.
      - erikpukinskis 10y ago
        Yah, that's called entitlement. I don't understand why people get so upset by that word.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- tbrownaw 10y ago
  What would you call it though? This thread is about killing life because rich folks want meat? Define "life". Because last I heard, plants count as "alive" too? One of the possible alternatives I'm aware of is ground up insects. Those are the same kind of "alive" as other animals, and yet AFAICT the "don't kill anything" people seem to things it's at least less bad. Even tho it takes a lot more of them to get the same amount of nutrition. Are you aware of things called "obligate carnivores"? How do they fit in to your moral framework? Have you played with evolutionary algorithms? Systems that have appropriate sensors / feedback loops to avoid harm to themselves (could even be as simple as a speed governor on an engine)? It can really be... odd to try to think of "life" (or even whatever term we're currently using to assign moral weight to anything capable of feeling pain) in general as being all that unique and special, when I can build something that meets most parts of most definitions in an afternoon. . Humans are omnivores, and I have the teeth to prove it. Stop demanding that I forsake my heritage, especially over some half-baked philosophy that isn't even compatible with my experiences.
  - pygy_ 10y ago
    We should all embrace nihilarianism. To save life, let's all starve to death :-) It's easier to empathize with mammals, but you're right, at this point, humans cannot survive without destroying (some) life. Edit: I'm fine with the ecologic/economic argument for minimizing meat consumption, though.
    - PrimalDual 10y ago
      I think this comes from vastly underestimating the value humans bring to other life. I would argue that without humans there is no life. We are the only species in the planet that has, in the next couple million years, the ability to allow life to expand throughout the universe. We are literally the only species alive that can do this. Without us life is frail and subject to the whims of cosmic events on our planet that could whipe it out. Humans bring a lot of value to the world and I think we play a critical role in the history of life. I find that people who argue against humans using earths resources forget that we have a very important role in the ecosystem. So important in fact, that a the extinction of a couple thousand of species and habitats is probably a small price to pay for us to learn how to use our incredible ability to control the environment.

"Perceived meat entitlement"? Can't imagine why you find people getting defensive.

by gozur88 10y ago

"Perceived meat entitlement"? Can't imagine why you find people getting defensive.

Not to me... Waiters to people and people to waiters, people at people at parties etc. What would you call it though? This thread is about killing life because rich folks want meat? If that is assumed true, then is that not a feeling of entitlement people have for some reason?

gozur88 10y ago
I suspect the problem is people are unhappy with your assumption of the entitlement to tell them what they ought to be eating.
- tluyben2 10y ago
  I am not telling anyone what to eat or not... I was just commenting that guys get very wound up by touching on the subject. This thread does not point the other way now does it?
  - gozur88 10y ago
    That's pretty disingenuous. "Touching the subject" of restricting what other people eat naturally will make them angry. Particularly the way you do it.
    - tluyben2 10y ago
      English is not my first language; what did I exactly say 'that way'? As I am not sure: by people (guys) getting angry I mean things like blokes shouting at a Thai waiter because they wanted "f*cking serious meat" and there was hardly any in the soup.
- erikpukinskis 10y ago
  Yah, it's interesting how people who believe they are entitled to things get offended when someone describes them has having entitlement. The argument is something like "don't call me entitled I'm entitled to eat as much meat as I want" ... which makes no sense to me.
  - GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
    Well, you're entitled to eat whatever you can afford to eat. If that's meat, it's meat.
    - erikpukinskis 10y ago
      Yah, that's called entitlement. I don't understand why people get so upset by that word.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
tbrownaw 10y ago
What would you call it though? This thread is about killing life because rich folks want meat? Define "life". Because last I heard, plants count as "alive" too? One of the possible alternatives I'm aware of is ground up insects. Those are the same kind of "alive" as other animals, and yet AFAICT the "don't kill anything" people seem to things it's at least less bad. Even tho it takes a lot more of them to get the same amount of nutrition. Are you aware of things called "obligate carnivores"? How do they fit in to your moral framework? Have you played with evolutionary algorithms? Systems that have appropriate sensors / feedback loops to avoid harm to themselves (could even be as simple as a speed governor on an engine)? It can really be... odd to try to think of "life" (or even whatever term we're currently using to assign moral weight to anything capable of feeling pain) in general as being all that unique and special, when I can build something that meets most parts of most definitions in an afternoon. . Humans are omnivores, and I have the teeth to prove it. Stop demanding that I forsake my heritage, especially over some half-baked philosophy that isn't even compatible with my experiences.
- pygy_ 10y ago
  We should all embrace nihilarianism. To save life, let's all starve to death :-) It's easier to empathize with mammals, but you're right, at this point, humans cannot survive without destroying (some) life. Edit: I'm fine with the ecologic/economic argument for minimizing meat consumption, though.
  - PrimalDual 10y ago
    I think this comes from vastly underestimating the value humans bring to other life. I would argue that without humans there is no life. We are the only species in the planet that has, in the next couple million years, the ability to allow life to expand throughout the universe. We are literally the only species alive that can do this. Without us life is frail and subject to the whims of cosmic events on our planet that could whipe it out. Humans bring a lot of value to the world and I think we play a critical role in the history of life. I find that people who argue against humans using earths resources forget that we have a very important role in the ecosystem. So important in fact, that a the extinction of a couple thousand of species and habitats is probably a small price to pay for us to learn how to use our incredible ability to control the environment.