3 ms·

My reasoning is based on the opposite of solipsism. I assume that I am not the only conscious being that can suffer. I also assume based on evidence that I am a

My reasoning is based on the opposite of solipsism. I assume that I am not the only conscious being that can suffer. I also assume based on evidence that I am a physical entity and my capacity for intelligence, consciousness, joy, and suffering is based on the makeup and complexity of my nervous system. This could be wrong, but there is a mountain of scientific evidence to support this view. Looking at other species, I assume that their capacity for and quality of experience is similar. Cows are mammals, sexual, social, emotional, relatively intelligence animals. I assume their capacity for suffering is somewhat proportional based on those traits. I have no proof of this and no one ever will unless we figure out how to communicate with cows directly (probably impossible). Plants don't seem to be conscious, at least on the same timescale, as humans. I think it's fairly obvious to anyone that they don't have the same capacity to suffer as a human. What would be your reasoning for supporting that view? Note that I grew up on a farm raising sheep, cows, turkeys, ducks, dogs, and cats, and have experienced first hand the domination and torture of individuals of all these species by myself, my parents, and our neighbors. Have you seen how industrial farming works? I think part of your comment might be based on the idea that vegans are playing a social virtue game rather than being compassionate for its own sake and you feel challenged and offended by that. I encourage you to break out of that mentality, although I admit many diets are based around that virtue game.

yieldcrv 3y ago
> I think part of your comment might be based on the idea that vegans are playing a social virtue game rather than being compassionate for its own sake and you feel challenged and offended by that Not quite, I find the chosen solution to be arbitrary and that the chosen solution continues to move with new information about what suffering is. Echoed by the less verbose quip someone made earlier in the thread about needing to switch to a rock based diet. I think several other rationales for the same dietary preferences are stronger, for example being against factory farming has nothing to do with only consuming plants it has to do with not consuming factory farmed meat. I think several other responses to the mammalian suffering observation are stronger, for example, regulating or reducing how much of it occurs, which would have a greater impact than your dietary preference.
- zztop44 3y ago
  It’s hard for an individual to regulate or reduce factory farming. And indeed the overlap between vegans and animal rights activists is likely quite large. But there’s also something to be said of simply opting out of a system you believe to be evil. For example, with slavery, the correct response is not to advocate to regulate or reduce how much slavery occurs while still being a slave owner. The correct response is first to not be a slave owner.
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    does your analogy extend to no pets as well? I’m trying to understand the extent of your particular position, or which similarity to focus on
    - zztop44 3y ago
      I don’t have any particular position, beyond hypocrisy. I’ve been vegan at times in the past, currently I’m not. As for pet ownership, I honestly don’t know. I think it’s certainly ethically complicated but personally I don’t think it’s wrong per se. I would say there’s a massive difference between keeping a dog as a pet and keeping a tiger or monkey, though.
      - yieldcrv 3y ago
        no field animals anymore but house animals though
      - block_dagger 3y ago
        Keeping a dog could be considered worse from the perspective of forced eugenics by our ancestors against canines. Domesticated dogs are abominations, some say.
- block_dagger 3y ago
  There's a clear difference, to me at least, between arbitrariness and the reasoning I've put forth. I agree that it is impossible to create an exact algorithm for choosing one's food to reduce suffering butt as new evidence is found, behaviors around food consumption _should_ change. Related though: we haven't discussed the energy efficiency of producing meat vs plant matter, which is another important factor, unrelated to suffering.
justinclift 3y ago
> I grew up on a farm ... Interesting. That seems like a clear case of "familiarity with these creatures lets me empathise with them". Wonder if people growing up among scuba diving families (or other situations very familiar with sea life) might have a parallel version of the same thing?

yieldcrv 3y ago

> I think part of your comment might be based on the idea that vegans are playing a social virtue game rather than being compassionate for its own sake and you feel challenged and offended by that Not quite, I find the chosen solution to be arbitrary and that the chosen solution continues to move with new information about what suffering is. Echoed by the less verbose quip someone made earlier in the thread about needing to switch to a rock based diet. I think several other rationales for the same dietary preferences are stronger, for example being against factory farming has nothing to do with only consuming plants it has to do with not consuming factory farmed meat. I think several other responses to the mammalian suffering observation are stronger, for example, regulating or reducing how much of it occurs, which would have a greater impact than your dietary preference.

zztop44 3y ago
It’s hard for an individual to regulate or reduce factory farming. And indeed the overlap between vegans and animal rights activists is likely quite large. But there’s also something to be said of simply opting out of a system you believe to be evil. For example, with slavery, the correct response is not to advocate to regulate or reduce how much slavery occurs while still being a slave owner. The correct response is first to not be a slave owner.
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  does your analogy extend to no pets as well? I’m trying to understand the extent of your particular position, or which similarity to focus on
  - zztop44 3y ago
    I don’t have any particular position, beyond hypocrisy. I’ve been vegan at times in the past, currently I’m not. As for pet ownership, I honestly don’t know. I think it’s certainly ethically complicated but personally I don’t think it’s wrong per se. I would say there’s a massive difference between keeping a dog as a pet and keeping a tiger or monkey, though.
    - yieldcrv 3y ago
      no field animals anymore but house animals though
    - block_dagger 3y ago
      Keeping a dog could be considered worse from the perspective of forced eugenics by our ancestors against canines. Domesticated dogs are abominations, some say.
block_dagger 3y ago
There's a clear difference, to me at least, between arbitrariness and the reasoning I've put forth. I agree that it is impossible to create an exact algorithm for choosing one's food to reduce suffering butt as new evidence is found, behaviors around food consumption _should_ change. Related though: we haven't discussed the energy efficiency of producing meat vs plant matter, which is another important factor, unrelated to suffering.

justinclift 3y ago

> I grew up on a farm ... Interesting. That seems like a clear case of "familiarity with these creatures lets me empathise with them". Wonder if people growing up among scuba diving families (or other situations very familiar with sea life) might have a parallel version of the same thing?