3 ms·

> It's thus nearly impossible to reason with reasonable people here, simply because the psychological consequence of losing the argument is so strong. I'd di

> It's thus nearly impossible to reason with reasonable people here, simply because the psychological consequence of losing the argument is so strong. I'd dispute the characterization of these people as reasonable, but given how common it is, I suppose I'm descending into pedantry a bit here. It may seem enormously childish (and it is), but I know very few people who seem able to acknowledge that an action of theirs may not be the optimally moral one. Almost universally, this baseline of ethical maturity is replaced with twisted, desperate contortionate reasoning as to why their actions are actually in the morally superior one. I personally still eat meat; I tried vegetarianism a few years ago but started weightlifting shortly after, which tends to have a pretty profound effect on my appetite and dietary needs. The difference is that I acknowledge that this is a moral failing of mine: I'm not a morally perfect being.

dTal 10y ago
I am not sure you get to claim any points for acknowledging your own moral failing. If anything, this kind of ethical "living in sin" is even worse than contortionist justification because you debase your own ethics, turning them into something that can be cast aside when convenient. You have two options - change your morals (accept and embrace that your desire to lift weights outweighs your concern for other beings). Or change your behaviour (stop either lifting weights or eating meat).
- joveian 10y ago
  I think this desire to feel like you are living a morally perfect life is strong in most people but incompatible with an honest observation of the world from just about any ethical standpoint. There are an endless number of Very Bad Things in the world and an endless number of things you can personally do to improve them. Really improving how your life reflects your ethics will necessarily involve a huge amount of failure, false starts, and half measures. The best results possible will never get you that far on an absolute scale. Even when a better path is fairly clear, human beings rarely make lasting changes in behavior instantly; there tend to be a lot of details and that need to be worked out and new movement patterns to learn. It is not clear from a brief message on the internet what a person has or has not done to make such changes. Even without intentionally making changes over time, you can recognize things that other people do that are better than what you do and be more likely to copy them or otherwise be inspired from them.
- wutbrodo 10y ago
  > I am not sure you get to claim any points for acknowledging your own moral failing. I get where you're coming from philosophically, but have a couple major points of disagreement. 1) I don't consider willful ignorance and dishonesty to be preferable to honesty 2) I'm speaking specifically of people whose actions contradict their own stated moral preferences. An ethical system that's brittle enough to fall apart with a couple pointed questions barely meets the definition of an ethical system. 3) Consequentially speaking, lying to protect your own self-image has consequences beyond your own life. We're social animals and bullshit causes collateral damage.

dTal 10y ago

I am not sure you get to claim any points for acknowledging your own moral failing. If anything, this kind of ethical "living in sin" is even worse than contortionist justification because you debase your own ethics, turning them into something that can be cast aside when convenient. You have two options - change your morals (accept and embrace that your desire to lift weights outweighs your concern for other beings). Or change your behaviour (stop either lifting weights or eating meat).

joveian 10y ago
I think this desire to feel like you are living a morally perfect life is strong in most people but incompatible with an honest observation of the world from just about any ethical standpoint. There are an endless number of Very Bad Things in the world and an endless number of things you can personally do to improve them. Really improving how your life reflects your ethics will necessarily involve a huge amount of failure, false starts, and half measures. The best results possible will never get you that far on an absolute scale. Even when a better path is fairly clear, human beings rarely make lasting changes in behavior instantly; there tend to be a lot of details and that need to be worked out and new movement patterns to learn. It is not clear from a brief message on the internet what a person has or has not done to make such changes. Even without intentionally making changes over time, you can recognize things that other people do that are better than what you do and be more likely to copy them or otherwise be inspired from them.
wutbrodo 10y ago
> I am not sure you get to claim any points for acknowledging your own moral failing. I get where you're coming from philosophically, but have a couple major points of disagreement. 1) I don't consider willful ignorance and dishonesty to be preferable to honesty 2) I'm speaking specifically of people whose actions contradict their own stated moral preferences. An ethical system that's brittle enough to fall apart with a couple pointed questions barely meets the definition of an ethical system. 3) Consequentially speaking, lying to protect your own self-image has consequences beyond your own life. We're social animals and bullshit causes collateral damage.