3 ms·

> And yet, I eat pigs without remorse because being born on a planet where animals eat each other is not something I chose, therefore I do not feel guilty about

> And yet, I eat pigs without remorse because being born on a planet where animals eat each other is not something I chose, therefore I do not feel guilty about it. You were born on a planet where rape and murder[0] is common in the animal kingdom too, yet quite rightly we humans have collectively decided that they are monsterous practices. "It's the natural order" is not a good basis for reasoning. [0] which we will here distinguish from killing for food, for example intra-species killing over territory, mates, etc.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
Thanks for the reply. I think you understand my comment as making a point about the "naturalness" of eating animals (I certainly did not use the expression "natural order"). I'm rather making a point about universality. As far as I can tell, all animals eat other living things- be it plants or other animals. Humans eat both plants and other animals. This is not my choice, so I don't feel morally responsible for it. It's how I found things when I came into this world. I would rather things were different. I would rather not have to kill anything in order to feed. However, this is what we do. We kill other animals and eat them. We kill plants and eat them. Well, at least we usually eat them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_killing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_killing). Note that I find killing for sport morally unjustifiable. Rape and murder are not universals. That is, some animals rape and murder their own and some cannibalise their own, but not all animals do. In any case, I personally have never felt a compelling need to rape or murder anyone, so I can attest to the fact that it's not a universal experience for humans to rape and murder (assuming I'm actually human and not some weird mutation eh). Edit: As a summary of my views, I recommend "that's how it works" over "it's the natural order", which has connotations of a moral imperative that I don't recognise.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago

Thanks for the reply. I think you understand my comment as making a point about the "naturalness" of eating animals (I certainly did not use the expression "natural order"). I'm rather making a point about universality. As far as I can tell, all animals eat other living things- be it plants or other animals. Humans eat both plants and other animals. This is not my choice, so I don't feel morally responsible for it. It's how I found things when I came into this world. I would rather things were different. I would rather not have to kill anything in order to feed. However, this is what we do. We kill other animals and eat them. We kill plants and eat them. Well, at least we usually eat them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_killing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_killing). Note that I find killing for sport morally unjustifiable. Rape and murder are not universals. That is, some animals rape and murder their own and some cannibalise their own, but not all animals do. In any case, I personally have never felt a compelling need to rape or murder anyone, so I can attest to the fact that it's not a universal experience for humans to rape and murder (assuming I'm actually human and not some weird mutation eh). Edit: As a summary of my views, I recommend "that's how it works" over "it's the natural order", which has connotations of a moral imperative that I don't recognise.