4 ms·
Its true though, not being able feel empathy for anyone or thing that is not normal. So any individual who can't would be well served going to a psychologist or
by amusedcyclist 5y ago
Its true though, not being able feel empathy for anyone or thing that is not normal. So any individual who can't would be well served going to a psychologist or being expelled from society entirely. Reduction of suffering being good is generally viewed as axiomatic. I don't want any part of any moral code that doesn't assume that. And I frankly don't care about the feelings of those who are indifferent to suffering.
- rootusrootus 5y agoI think it is a pretty big leap from 'maybe this is not automatically good' to 'you must be a pscyhopath.' If there were no trade-offs, then it would be a short discussion and we could definitely fall back on axioms.
- amusedcyclist 5y agoTheres a huge difference between the statements "Lots of humans eatanimals for sustenance and there is a tradeoff between the value we derive vs the suffering of the animals" vs "Prove that I should care about suffering".
- only_as_i_fall 5y agoI mean more likely the OP is just being edgy and is only performatively apathetic at a surface level, but the only thing we have to go off of are their words, which do point to some deeper problem.
- matz1 5y ago>or being expelled from society entirely So the main reason to exploit animal is because the other human hate it and that other human could harm you. I see so it has nothing to do with the animal suffering itself.
- amusedcyclist 5y agoNo its because the presence of such people in society only increases total overall suffering (animal or human).
- matz1 5y agoBut why would I care about the increase of animal suffering (if not because other human may angry) ?