Is it morally wrong to eat meat? Watch

This discussion is closed.
material breach
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#81
Report 14 years ago
#81
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
Animals are conscious, or at least I contend they are. Pain is just a part of being conscious, or an indication of it- I wanted to simplify. What I believe seperates animals from us is that we are self-conscious. We can make moral decisions and they cannot. However, this doesn't mean we can dictate what happens to them, as they are capable of living an existence in which they are conscious of pleasure and pain, and deserve to experience life on their own accord.
why do they deserve?
0
RA87
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#82
Report 14 years ago
#82
Fine enjoy your charred cattle corpse
Actually I like my steak medium rare!
0
cheesecakebobby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#83
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#83
(Original post by Speciez99)
To be honest this is starting to split hairs, I appreciate as I have already acknowledged to Howard that when you take the situation to these extremes its becomes very difficult to apply the general rule. You jumped on my arguement, and have provided a very good but rather specific counter example. One that I concede too. There is obviously a sliding scale of mental capacity and obvious there is little distiction between a several retard person and a pig or dolphin. You are still to prove this is the case tho for the "average" human and "average" animal. Why must we value a sheep with the same regard as we do our fellow citizeans?
evolution is irrelevant, with enough time the soya beans could develop brains.

I dont really follow this last bit I am sorry, an clarification would be appreciated.
I see your point. But I don't want to talk about "average" humans or animals. Just that it doesn't matter how conscious a creature is, if it is capable of living an existence distinct from us, one which can be pleasurable or the converse, I feel it deserves the right to life. You are right too about the soya bean, just like the mental patient, the alien or the animal, its what it is rather than what it could be. If soya beans did have brains, and/or consciousness (lets not turn this into a debate about what constitutes consciousness, thats for another day as it would take forever!) then I feel that would put them on a par with the animals we eat regularly without second thought.

Edit: oops, forgot to classify that point about farming etc. The point was that saying an animal, for example a turkey has led a happy life on a farm on the grounds that it wasn't brutalised is not a great reason to say it is moral to then kill it. I also addressed a different point, one which you didn't actually make but it goes hand in hand, that this turkey would not have existed had it not been bred for the reason of being our christmas dinner. All this would apply to a mentally incapacitated person, if they were bred for eating. Thats why I said it doesn't really justify anything.
0
cheesecakebobby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#84
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#84
(Original post by Speciez99)
why do they deserve?
Why do we deserve?
0
material breach
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#85
Report 14 years ago
#85
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
I see your point. But I don't want to talk about "average" humans or animals. Just that it doesn't matter how conscious a creature is, if it is capable of living an existence distinct from us, one which can be pleasurable or the converse, I feel it deserves the right to life. You are right too about the soya bean, just like the mental patient, the alien or the animal, its what it is rather than what it could be. If soya beans did have brains, and/or consciousness (lets not turn this into a debate about what constitutes consciousness, thats for another day as it would take forever!) then I feel that would put them on a par with the animals we eat regularly without second thought.
So do you kill spiders or squat mosquitoes?
I think the degree to which a cow experiences pleasure is up for debate. Even if it does experience pleasure, that does not give us a moral justification for us not eating it. You feel we should not.
0
A0307
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#86
Report 14 years ago
#86
Pah, who cares. Bobby, go eat your cheesecake, but I'll have a burger.
0
material breach
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#87
Report 14 years ago
#87
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
Why do we deserve?
We have no right due to nature to live, it just happens nothing is really going to kill us.
0
material breach
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#88
Report 14 years ago
#88
(Original post by calumc)
Pah, who cares. Bobby, go eat your cheesecake, but I'll have a burger.
why do i get the impression he is :
1. doing philosphy
2. doing this as a topic at the moment in his course at whatever level
0
cheesecakebobby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#89
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#89
(Original post by calumc)
Pah, who cares. Bobby, go eat your cheesecake, but I'll have a burger.
Thank you for your visionary comment in this thread, in the philosophy section of a debate forum.

(Original post by Speciez99)
So do you kill spiders or squat mosquitoes?
I think the degree to which a cow experiences pleasure is up for debate. Even if it does experience pleasure, that does not give us a moral justification for us not eating it. You feel we should not.
Actually I throw spiders out the window, doesn't hurt them. And we have justification for killing mosquitos, they can give us diseases. Its like shooting a rhino thats trying to stamp on you. Actually its a lot like the human "self-defence" plea against killing someone, in a way.

Obviously we can never know exactly what a cow experiences, but we can see that it acts calmly when in certain circumstances, such as in an open field with plenty of grass, and we see it flinch in pain if it gets bitten by a lion. As for "deserving" to live, I merely mean that we should allow it to have an existence of its own just as it would be immoral for us to force a child to grow up in an isolated bubble, like some kind of restricted and regulated Truman Show-esque existence. I just want to be clear that I don't feel we should make it our duty to ensure every animal has a perfect life- that would entail us interfering with every predator-prey struggle, and saying animals shouldn't eat each other- which I have already explained as being devoid of morality as animals are incapable of making moral decisions.
0
cheesecakebobby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#90
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#90
(Original post by Speciez99)
why do i get the impression he is :
1. doing philosphy
2. doing this as a topic at the moment in his course at whatever level
Heh, i'm doing A2 philosophy and want to do it at Uni (haven't decided which one yet, though Cambridge didn't want me, those, those....elitist scum!)

But I'm not studying this as a topic. Its just personal for me as I am of course a vegetarian, and just in the same way I do not follow a religion, its not something i simply do without thinking.
0
A0307
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#91
Report 14 years ago
#91
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
Thank you for your visionary comment in this thread, in the philosophy section of a debate forum.
Good to know my contribution is appreciated.

I did care up until a point, when you all started "splitting hairs" as I believe someone put it, and it became ridiculous. That and the likelyhood of any meaningful conclusion being reached being approximately zero.
0
Zarathustra
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#92
Report 14 years ago
#92
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
Heh, i'm doing A2 philosophy and want to do it at Uni (haven't decided which one yet, though Cambridge didn't want me, those, those....elitist scum!)
Where have you applied/got offers from?
Cam aren't elitist scum...

ZarathustraX
0
material breach
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#93
Report 14 years ago
#93
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
Heh, i'm doing A2 philosophy and want to do it at Uni (haven't decided which one yet, though Cambridge didn't want me, those, those....elitist scum!)

But I'm not studying this as a topic. Its just personal for me as I am of course a vegetarian, and just in the same way I do not follow a religion, its not something i simply do without thinking.
Well you should easily wipe the floor we me if you were good enough to be even considered for cambridge. Thank you for making me think.
0
cheesecakebobby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#94
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#94
(Original post by calumc)
Good to know my contribution is appreciated.

I did care up until a point, when you all started "splitting hairs" as I believe someone put it, and it became ridiculous. That and the likelyhood of any meaningful conclusion being reached being approximately zero.
Because every philosophy debate ever has finished with a meaningful conclusion :rolleyes: Many will agree that when it comes down to "splitting hairs" you have reached a sort of philosophical barrier however.
0
cheesecakebobby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#95
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#95
(Original post by Zarathustra)
Where have you applied/got offers from?
Cam aren't elitist scum...

ZarathustraX
Yeah, I don't really care tbh. I'm waiting to hear from Kings, my first choice (JH with war studies). I have offers (JH with history) at York, Sheffield, Kent, and Southampton (EEE). So I'm sure I'll end up equally happy somewhere else.

And Speciez, Im no philosophy genius, and you seem a good debater, thanks for the intellectual workout
0
Zarathustra
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#96
Report 14 years ago
#96
Imho, the main problem is not with the fact that reasoned philosophical discussion wouldn't be able to reach a conclusion in this instance, but more that there has been very little 'philosophical' debate around. Imho, obv.

ZarathustraX
0
Zarathustra
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#97
Report 14 years ago
#97
(Original post by cheesecakebobby)
Yeah, I don't really care tbh. I'm waiting to hear from Kings, my first choice (JH with war studies). I have offers (JH with history) at York, Sheffield, Kent, and Southampton (EEE). So I'm sure I'll end up equally happy somewhere else.
Many congratulations, dude

ZarathustraX
0
pedy1986
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#98
Report 14 years ago
#98
(Original post by Zarathustra)
Humans have duties as soon as they band together in societies etc:
Considering their was no 'social contract', the only way we could have duties would be through tacit consent, obviously meaning not direct. However, is this a reasonble grounds to a duty?

For instance, if you say we have two duties X and Y, which incurr the rights of A and B. It is impossible for me to 'opt out' of right A so I don't have to do duty X. It therefore seems to me the whole notion of duties being the basis of rights is meaningless.
0
canuck
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#99
Report 14 years ago
#99
One thing i would like to mention. "fear factor" is morally wrong.
0
mvmv
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#100
Report 14 years ago
#100
(Original post by Speciez99)
Your arguement is bascially eating meat is healthy, I would agree, yet clearly so many vegetrains out there are not dropping dead in the street that the vitamins from meat are not essential.
well they are essential if you want to be as healthy as possible

people that eat meat aree a hell of a lot healthier than vegetarians

who said vegetarians randomly drop dead?
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (1377)
79.5%
Leave (355)
20.5%

Watched Threads

View All