4 ms·

It would have made much more sense if you put a bit more effort into trying to interpret what I said and didn't assume I think animal-eating was invented 200 ye

by stiff 13y ago

It would have made much more sense if you put a bit more effort into trying to interpret what I said and didn't assume I think animal-eating was invented 200 years ago... People certainly have a different emotional reaction from watching an animal die, this reaction being almost completely unknown those days, than from buying a hamburger in the supermarket, which doesn't provoke any emotion whatsoever. Do I have to convince you very much that emotions play a big role in the so called "morality" and especially being able to act on it? Obviously there are historical examples that there were people a very long time ago already that were concerned about the sad fate of the killed animals, for example Native Americans used to "thank" the animals they killed for providing food and ask them for forgiveness, Buddhist say "might you be reborn as a buddha" before eating meat etc., you will see this aspect of human life very carefully regulated by most religions, indicating it was a problem that concerned people from a very long time ago. For another, more general example, try to convince someone of sacrificing a very, very minor modern convenience of theirs for some greater good. I often have to go to terrible pains to explain that I am perfectly fine with my current phone and I don't want to waste it to just get a new toy, and I am far from being any kind of ecology freak. When I buy crips and coke at a grocery 50m from my flat and don't want a plastic bag, the seller assures me that it's for free so I don't have to worry :) The people who actually use any more substantial effort to not deprive too much resources are very often gravely ridiculed, because most of society seems to view resources as unlimited.

Shorel 13y ago
>and didn't assume I think animal-eating was invented 200 years ago... Sorry to jump here, but he clearly did not wrote that. He wrote in fact the opposite. He said we have been killing animals to survive for a very long time. It is you who attach some kind of moral meaning to the act of killing and eating an animal. Some people have to do it, for them to feel purer (in the past) or hipsterer (now). I would prefer to become food at the end of my life, Soylent Green style, instead of such mind shenanigan‎s. It's good that you don't ask for bags in the grocery, but in the end this means little if human population keeps growing and growing.

by stiff 13y ago

Shorel 13y ago

>and didn't assume I think animal-eating was invented 200 years ago... Sorry to jump here, but he clearly did not wrote that. He wrote in fact the opposite. He said we have been killing animals to survive for a very long time. It is you who attach some kind of moral meaning to the act of killing and eating an animal. Some people have to do it, for them to feel purer (in the past) or hipsterer (now). I would prefer to become food at the end of my life, Soylent Green style, instead of such mind shenanigan‎s. It's good that you don't ask for bags in the grocery, but in the end this means little if human population keeps growing and growing.