4 ms·
Thanks for the diagnosis, I think it's not as highly unusual as you might think. I bet outside of their relatively small social circles humans aren't preoccupie
by omega3 5y ago
Thanks for the diagnosis, I think it's not as highly unusual as you might think. I bet outside of their relatively small social circles humans aren't preoccupied with reduction of suffering or altruism in any meaningful way. Of course, it's not a fashionable thing to say (see the downwotes) and I'd love to be proven wrong but I just don't see it.
- amusedcyclist 5y agoMost people may not be concerned with reduction of suffering but those that argue for not killing animals for food definitely are. I'm not sure why you think it has anything to do with being fashionable.
- dsomers 5y agoI disagree, the rate of vegetarianism has been increasing over the years and the rate of people demanding more ethical meat products e.g. free range eggs and chicken becoming more popular too. This is the free market catering to demand that was almost non existent 30 years ago.
- shawnz 5y agoMost people probably don't preoccupy themselves with reduction of suffering, but that is not the same as saying most people don't see value in reducing suffering.
- logifail 5y ago> I bet outside of their relatively small social circles humans aren't preoccupied with reduction of suffering or altruism in any meaningful way Could it be that reduction of _observable_ suffering is what many people are actually concerned about, not the underlying suffering as such? It's OK to buy a burger - just as long as you don't have to watch how it's made. It's OK to buy a $5 imported shirt - as long as you don't have to observe the conditions under which it was produced.
- adrianN 5y agoThere is a difference between not actively working on reducing suffering and not seeing a point in reducing suffering.