7 ms·

> People eat meat because they like the taste and the texture, but at the same time everyone knows that meat is produced by killing animals, and that it's much

> People eat meat because they like the taste and the texture, but at the same time everyone knows that meat is produced by killing animals, and that it's much less sustainable than vegetarian food. I think this is too generous. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but the implicit message here is that people actually care about the animals and sustainability of meat farming. My spouse is vegetarian and I'm whatever. I don't buy meat but if it finds itself in front of me I'll eat it. I have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. Yes, this is anecdotal, and I'm willing to read a source and change my opinion if there is some evidence that people actually give a shit about the animals. As far as I can tell, it is all just virtue signaling at best. I agree with OP. I think we would be better served in the long run creating good consumables that have the caloric density and amino acid profiles found in meats and encourage people to eat those instead of trying to replicate something we should be horrified about.

scottLobster 6y ago
As an avid meat-eater (because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons), my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. Obviously I have no control over where restaurants source their food from, but I try to preference those who claim ethical/sustainable practices. As for sustainability, the answer to that is to develop systems that price in environmental externalities. The issue isn't going to be solved through a meat boycott. Farm raised fish is also quite sustainable. I'm personally looking forward to economically viable lab-grown meat. Once perfected it'll likely be the most sustainable option with none of the nutritional deficits and none of the ethical concerns. Plus we'll be able to engineer meat with tastes that don't exist in nature, endless variety!
- f430 6y ago
  > my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. So the solution is to pay more. Got it.
- ookdatnog 6y ago
  > because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons This is such a non-argument, and I'm saying this as a(n occasional) meat-eater. > nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things The default state for most living beings is scarcity. I think we all intuitively judge the morality of people's actions depending on scarcity. If two people were on an uninhabited island with no chance to escape, and the island only produces enough food to sustain one person, then I don't think it's immoral for them to fight to the death over the scarce resources, neither of them has the duty to sacrifice their life for the other. But if the island produces enough for two people, then killing the other so you can have more food is clearly murder. Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. In this dog eat dog world, I don't think eating meat was immoral. But the scarcity that justified it has disappeared for many (but sadly not nearly all) of us. > humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons There is no evidence that vegetarian diets are less healthy than those that incorporate meat. Again, eating meat no doubt increased the chances of survival for ancient hunter-gatherers living in harsh conditions, but that's no longer our environment, so it is irrelevant. To be clear, I'm not offended by the fact that you eat meat; I am irritated by the weak justification though, which is worse than no justification at all. Just have the honesty to admit that you are merely putting your comfort above the well-being of the animals you eat. Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat.
  - BlargMcLarg 6y ago
    >I am irritated by the weak justification though Pot, kettle. >Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. It doesn't stop there. Humans have subsequently evolved to thrive on fatty foods. Our understanding of nutritional evolution is incredibly weak. Despite agriculture predominantly giving us access to carbohydrates, human brains are mostly fat-adapted. Many of today's health epidemics are linked to a lack of fat and an excess of carbohydrates. Try finding fatty fruits and veggies: they were incredibly scarce for most the human population until the last 100 years. Several people have noticed significant improvements going predominantly meat. There's more going on here than just the scarcity argument, the scarcity argument is a gross simplification. >Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat No. Plenty of people are eating meat to be healthy. People are, in fact, getting frustrated by listening to the advice of the average western diet, listening to dietitians when they get fat, and unable to get in shape despite putting in an insane amount of effort listening to their dietitians putting their hormones out of whack, making them hungry and agitated 24/7, while they keep saying "just keep going". We don't process meat-based products the same way we do plant-based products. This is not to moralize meat. Rather, this is to indicate people jump on the "meat is bad / lazy / immoral" bandwagon way too quickly, being spoonfed the common narrative without doing an ounce of research and frequently without experience. Just like the average person doesn't eat meat for any other reason than their own comfort, so does the average person stop eating meat because everyone and their mother claims eating plants will save the world. It's becoming a story of "my propaganda is better than yours".
- novok 6y ago
  After doing some more research, I've found meat isn't as cruel as most think it is, and even vegetable farming isn't as animal injury / cruelty free as people would think. Often many, many small animals get basically wood chipped by agricultural machinery or poisoned by pest traps and pesticides. If you go by pure numbers of "non-insect brains" made to feel pain or die in horrible ways from human agricultural activity, vegetable farming would actually far outpace meat farming. Also a lot of meat ranching can use land that is plain unusable for vegetables, but cows, chickens, sheep and pigs can use just fine. That will not go away. Also meat such as cows especially are not subject to the 'cows living in shit up to their knees' type of reality everyone thinks most cheap cow meat lives in, which is actually a small minority of badly run farms. All cow meat lives in a pasture for at least %70 of their lives. That last %30 is the difference between 'grass fed' and conventional beef. All food has blood on its hands, and in the end, that is the way of life in human and non-human reality. I think a big part of the push to be vegetarian or vegan comes from a disconnect on how food is made. Societies used to be +%90 agricultural workers and processed their food in far more raw forms than the typical "abstract shapes of meat" that we typically deal with today, so a lot of the rhetoric did not connect, because it conflicted with their lived experience.
- atweiden 6y ago
  > my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. No it isn't. [1] It really isn't. [2] [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko
fossuser 6y ago
Sample size of one, but I eventually changed my habits because I care about trying to reduce unnecessary suffering. For years I knew I was inconsistent - I thought it was wrong to eat meat, but I did so anyway because I like hamburgers and chicken (and was focusing will power on other things). The pandemic gave me the opportunity to make the change. The impossible burger is perfect for me because it’s close enough to satisfy the fix. I hope more meat substitutes trend in this direction (or even more so with lab grown meat). Most people believe crazy things and hold wildly inconsistent views so it’s not a surprise that people don’t change their behavior. Having consistent views that are tied to reality is hard. Changing behavior is hard too. In the extreme cases (particularly with true unknowns) perfect consistency isn’t even necessarily achievable or desirable. That said, trying to understand the world as it truly is and be pragmatic is still good. In the animal case, I think trying to reduce unnecessary suffering is a worthwhile goal. Related: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demands-for-rigor/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demand...
rictic 6y ago
One person's model: People's tastes are largely driven by the foods they ate when they were young, which with notable exceptions, will prominently feature meat dishes. People on sites like this are likely to underestimate this effect, we are likely to be embedded in subcultures that are unusually high in openness to experience. All else being equal, many people prefer doing the more ethical thing (or if you want to be cynical about it, the thing that makes them feel more ethical). Many people believe that plant based meat is more ethical. Currently, all else isn't equal. Plant-based meat is more expensive to the consumer, and most find it to be less enjoyable to eat. Recent trends have been closing those gaps, producing more enjoyable plant-based meats at high but dropping prices. As plant-based meat's quality/price ratio improves it will be increasingly common, and will displace a large amount of meat consumption that would be difficult to displace by other vegetarian dishes.
megablast 6y ago
> have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. You’re conclusion is faulty. There can be many reasons for these people to keep eating meet, from they don’t believe you, they don’t like your argument, they still think it worth the animals pain, they don’t think they have a choice, or they’ve always done it. For someone to conclude from their own argument at a dinner table anything substantive is very strange.
jchw 6y ago
FWIW, I enjoy eating meats, and do not feel very concerned about the moral aspects. However, I still tried some Impossible foods just because of the novelty, and found that it would be a fine substitute in many cases. Many people who drive electric cars now do so because they are “cool.” A large part of that is thanks to Tesla, making electric cars that are comparable and maybe even simply superior to gas cars, depending on how you look at it. The hype behind impossible foods may be largely unwarranted, as great plant-based foods are already available. However, the thing that is great about impossible foods and similar ventures is that it doesn’t ask you to compromise, and it’s cool and trendy. Someone may not care about the moral side of things and yet will probably still feel enticed to try it just to see, and if it’s good enough they could legitimately switch on a whim. This is not the same as asking someone who has eaten a diet involving one thing for decades and asking them to replace it with totally different things. Many people have more strongly held convictions about having to change their diet in ways that impact their eating experience than they have convictions against the actual concept of plant-based diets. These meat alternatives could be very useful if a plant-based diet is to be the future (perhaps alongside lab grown meats?)
henrikschroder 6y ago
> I have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. This doesn't mean that people don't care about the horrors of the animal industry. It just means that they don't care enough to change their habits. Huge difference. Which is why meat alternatives are so important, because they allow people to stop eating meat without changing their habits! Neither you nor the GP really eat meat, which means that neither of you belong to the target group for this product! You are not the consumer! You clearly do not understand the whole point of these plant-based meat alternatives! Your thoughts and opinions on the product development and marketing of these are 100% irrelevant, because they're not competing for your dollars! This product is not for you. This product is for people who want meat, who love meat, people who wants to eat greasy, tasty, juicy, meaty burgers, and who don't want to substitute that for a "delicious" salad. > and encourage people to eat those instead No! First you need to develop meat alternatives so that everyone can replace most of the meat in their diets without hassle, without sacrificing anything, without changing their diet. Then you can encourage people to branch out into other vegetarian dishes, since they're actually already practically vegetarians.
- kharak 6y ago
  Your "they care but don't care enough to change habits" take is highly entlightening. This is going to help my perspective on a range of issues where binary thinking invites itselve. Thanks!
  - cm2012 6y ago
    Yeah, I personally openly admit that eating factory farmed meat is highly immoral, but it's too easy and tasty so I'm not going to stop doing it.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
string 6y ago
> I have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. For what it's worth. I had a conversation at the dinner table about the ethics of eating meat with another meat eater. We both decided there and then stop, this was almost a decade ago and neither of us have eaten meat since. It does happen.
FalconSensei 6y ago
> Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but the implicit message here is that people actually care about the animals and sustainability of meat farming. Given what I see people saying and doing - in person and online - seems that too many people don't even care about other people. People don't want to raise minimum wage because a burger would cost a few cents more. I have a hard time imagining them giving up their burgers because of the animals.

scottLobster 6y ago

As an avid meat-eater (because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons), my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. Obviously I have no control over where restaurants source their food from, but I try to preference those who claim ethical/sustainable practices. As for sustainability, the answer to that is to develop systems that price in environmental externalities. The issue isn't going to be solved through a meat boycott. Farm raised fish is also quite sustainable. I'm personally looking forward to economically viable lab-grown meat. Once perfected it'll likely be the most sustainable option with none of the nutritional deficits and none of the ethical concerns. Plus we'll be able to engineer meat with tastes that don't exist in nature, endless variety!

f430 6y ago
> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. So the solution is to pay more. Got it.
ookdatnog 6y ago
> because nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things and humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons This is such a non-argument, and I'm saying this as a(n occasional) meat-eater. > nature almost by definition is living things eating other living things The default state for most living beings is scarcity. I think we all intuitively judge the morality of people's actions depending on scarcity. If two people were on an uninhabited island with no chance to escape, and the island only produces enough food to sustain one person, then I don't think it's immoral for them to fight to the death over the scarce resources, neither of them has the duty to sacrifice their life for the other. But if the island produces enough for two people, then killing the other so you can have more food is clearly murder. Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. In this dog eat dog world, I don't think eating meat was immoral. But the scarcity that justified it has disappeared for many (but sadly not nearly all) of us. > humans evolved to be omnivorous for various nutritional reasons There is no evidence that vegetarian diets are less healthy than those that incorporate meat. Again, eating meat no doubt increased the chances of survival for ancient hunter-gatherers living in harsh conditions, but that's no longer our environment, so it is irrelevant. To be clear, I'm not offended by the fact that you eat meat; I am irritated by the weak justification though, which is worse than no justification at all. Just have the honesty to admit that you are merely putting your comfort above the well-being of the animals you eat. Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat.
- BlargMcLarg 6y ago
  >I am irritated by the weak justification though Pot, kettle. >Humans evolved the ability to eat meat because it increased their chances of survival in a hostile environment with scarce resources. It doesn't stop there. Humans have subsequently evolved to thrive on fatty foods. Our understanding of nutritional evolution is incredibly weak. Despite agriculture predominantly giving us access to carbohydrates, human brains are mostly fat-adapted. Many of today's health epidemics are linked to a lack of fat and an excess of carbohydrates. Try finding fatty fruits and veggies: they were incredibly scarce for most the human population until the last 100 years. Several people have noticed significant improvements going predominantly meat. There's more going on here than just the scarcity argument, the scarcity argument is a gross simplification. >Comfort is the only reason why healthy people eat meat No. Plenty of people are eating meat to be healthy. People are, in fact, getting frustrated by listening to the advice of the average western diet, listening to dietitians when they get fat, and unable to get in shape despite putting in an insane amount of effort listening to their dietitians putting their hormones out of whack, making them hungry and agitated 24/7, while they keep saying "just keep going". We don't process meat-based products the same way we do plant-based products. This is not to moralize meat. Rather, this is to indicate people jump on the "meat is bad / lazy / immoral" bandwagon way too quickly, being spoonfed the common narrative without doing an ounce of research and frequently without experience. Just like the average person doesn't eat meat for any other reason than their own comfort, so does the average person stop eating meat because everyone and their mother claims eating plants will save the world. It's becoming a story of "my propaganda is better than yours".
novok 6y ago
After doing some more research, I've found meat isn't as cruel as most think it is, and even vegetable farming isn't as animal injury / cruelty free as people would think. Often many, many small animals get basically wood chipped by agricultural machinery or poisoned by pest traps and pesticides. If you go by pure numbers of "non-insect brains" made to feel pain or die in horrible ways from human agricultural activity, vegetable farming would actually far outpace meat farming. Also a lot of meat ranching can use land that is plain unusable for vegetables, but cows, chickens, sheep and pigs can use just fine. That will not go away. Also meat such as cows especially are not subject to the 'cows living in shit up to their knees' type of reality everyone thinks most cheap cow meat lives in, which is actually a small minority of badly run farms. All cow meat lives in a pasture for at least %70 of their lives. That last %30 is the difference between 'grass fed' and conventional beef. All food has blood on its hands, and in the end, that is the way of life in human and non-human reality. I think a big part of the push to be vegetarian or vegan comes from a disconnect on how food is made. Societies used to be +%90 agricultural workers and processed their food in far more raw forms than the typical "abstract shapes of meat" that we typically deal with today, so a lot of the rhetoric did not connect, because it conflicted with their lived experience.
atweiden 6y ago
> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats. It's better for my health and much better for the animals. No it isn't. [1] It really isn't. [2] [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtnlwqEii2I [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko

fossuser 6y ago

Sample size of one, but I eventually changed my habits because I care about trying to reduce unnecessary suffering. For years I knew I was inconsistent - I thought it was wrong to eat meat, but I did so anyway because I like hamburgers and chicken (and was focusing will power on other things). The pandemic gave me the opportunity to make the change. The impossible burger is perfect for me because it’s close enough to satisfy the fix. I hope more meat substitutes trend in this direction (or even more so with lab grown meat). Most people believe crazy things and hold wildly inconsistent views so it’s not a surprise that people don’t change their behavior. Having consistent views that are tied to reality is hard. Changing behavior is hard too. In the extreme cases (particularly with true unknowns) perfect consistency isn’t even necessarily achievable or desirable. That said, trying to understand the world as it truly is and be pragmatic is still good. In the animal case, I think trying to reduce unnecessary suffering is a worthwhile goal. Related: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demands-for-rigor/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demand...

rictic 6y ago

One person's model: People's tastes are largely driven by the foods they ate when they were young, which with notable exceptions, will prominently feature meat dishes. People on sites like this are likely to underestimate this effect, we are likely to be embedded in subcultures that are unusually high in openness to experience. All else being equal, many people prefer doing the more ethical thing (or if you want to be cynical about it, the thing that makes them feel more ethical). Many people believe that plant based meat is more ethical. Currently, all else isn't equal. Plant-based meat is more expensive to the consumer, and most find it to be less enjoyable to eat. Recent trends have been closing those gaps, producing more enjoyable plant-based meats at high but dropping prices. As plant-based meat's quality/price ratio improves it will be increasingly common, and will displace a large amount of meat consumption that would be difficult to displace by other vegetarian dishes.

megablast 6y ago

> have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. You’re conclusion is faulty. There can be many reasons for these people to keep eating meet, from they don’t believe you, they don’t like your argument, they still think it worth the animals pain, they don’t think they have a choice, or they’ve always done it. For someone to conclude from their own argument at a dinner table anything substantive is very strange.

jchw 6y ago

FWIW, I enjoy eating meats, and do not feel very concerned about the moral aspects. However, I still tried some Impossible foods just because of the novelty, and found that it would be a fine substitute in many cases. Many people who drive electric cars now do so because they are “cool.” A large part of that is thanks to Tesla, making electric cars that are comparable and maybe even simply superior to gas cars, depending on how you look at it. The hype behind impossible foods may be largely unwarranted, as great plant-based foods are already available. However, the thing that is great about impossible foods and similar ventures is that it doesn’t ask you to compromise, and it’s cool and trendy. Someone may not care about the moral side of things and yet will probably still feel enticed to try it just to see, and if it’s good enough they could legitimately switch on a whim. This is not the same as asking someone who has eaten a diet involving one thing for decades and asking them to replace it with totally different things. Many people have more strongly held convictions about having to change their diet in ways that impact their eating experience than they have convictions against the actual concept of plant-based diets. These meat alternatives could be very useful if a plant-based diet is to be the future (perhaps alongside lab grown meats?)

henrikschroder 6y ago

> I have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. This doesn't mean that people don't care about the horrors of the animal industry. It just means that they don't care enough to change their habits. Huge difference. Which is why meat alternatives are so important, because they allow people to stop eating meat without changing their habits! Neither you nor the GP really eat meat, which means that neither of you belong to the target group for this product! You are not the consumer! You clearly do not understand the whole point of these plant-based meat alternatives! Your thoughts and opinions on the product development and marketing of these are 100% irrelevant, because they're not competing for your dollars! This product is not for you. This product is for people who want meat, who love meat, people who wants to eat greasy, tasty, juicy, meaty burgers, and who don't want to substitute that for a "delicious" salad. > and encourage people to eat those instead No! First you need to develop meat alternatives so that everyone can replace most of the meat in their diets without hassle, without sacrificing anything, without changing their diet. Then you can encourage people to branch out into other vegetarian dishes, since they're actually already practically vegetarians.

kharak 6y ago
Your "they care but don't care enough to change habits" take is highly entlightening. This is going to help my perspective on a range of issues where binary thinking invites itselve. Thanks!
- cm2012 6y ago
  Yeah, I personally openly admit that eating factory farmed meat is highly immoral, but it's too easy and tasty so I'm not going to stop doing it.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

string 6y ago

> I have had the conversation of the horrors of meat production many times at the dinner table with a spectrum of people, and nobody changed their habits. For what it's worth. I had a conversation at the dinner table about the ethics of eating meat with another meat eater. We both decided there and then stop, this was almost a decade ago and neither of us have eaten meat since. It does happen.

FalconSensei 6y ago

> Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but the implicit message here is that people actually care about the animals and sustainability of meat farming. Given what I see people saying and doing - in person and online - seems that too many people don't even care about other people. People don't want to raise minimum wage because a burger would cost a few cents more. I have a hard time imagining them giving up their burgers because of the animals.