Veganism

[BlueTangerine]

Sounds like it's you with the problem, not others.

If I had a quid for every time I've heard that :)

I've been through the absence of free will with you before and you didn't seem to get it or it's implications.

 

[SWP's back]

I'll try to post links later to what I've read and the conclusions it has made me form. All I was really saying was I think animals feel pain and distress and thus you are obligated to extend 'the golden rule' to them. Our Human nature isn't pretty or good and the only saving grace is our intelligence, it would be better if we didn't walk through our shit lives rationalizing our behaviour.

Again with the shit lives?

Serious question, are you ok?

 

[BlueTangerine]

You might have a shit life and want to over analyse every little thing in order to make it better. The majority of us just try and do the best for ourselves and our children. We all have our own definitions as to what that is.
Mine includes eating meat and I wouldn't have it any other way.

That's fine. But I am allowed to think you are thoughtless and/or selfish, as I believe I was for a long time. It's just a disagreement.

 

[Phil1]

That's fine. But I am allowed to think you are thoughtless and/or selfish, as I believe I was for a long time. It's just a disagreement.

The thing is mate, you're allowed your opinion and you often tell us how life, or more to the point humans, are ruining the world. You tell us what steps you make to make your life more bearable, yet you still sound very unhappy with your lot.
If I was you I'd change tact and just embrace the finer things, it can't be any worse.

 

[Why Always Ste]

Can any Vegans point me in the right direction for meat alternatives?
I'm frequently training throughout the week, need regular protein intake and even though I'm consuming alot I'm still only at 80kg
I tried switching off red meat and chicken to Fish but its just too fucking expensive and I'm just as unsure where its actually farmed.

Seems to be a vegan is to be constantly skinny, no muscle, and skint from having to buy all the fresh local produce.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I don't have compassion for animals because I don't have compassion for bacteria, or viruses, or plants and see them ranked along the same lines. This doesn't mean I don't love my dog or have a collection of cat skulls in my basement, it means that although I love my dog I recognise it as ultimately inferior to every human being alive by almost every metric apart from my own sentimentality borne out of what is essentially my own invention.

Surely yer put yer dog above the Stretford end in terms of every known metric. And what's with this skull collection in yer basement? Sounds a bit Fred West!

 

[Matty]

I'm not unwilling to admit anything. I dont believe flies feel pain, I believe they have reflexes . My comfort also comes first and if there was nothing else to eat I would have to kill to survive.

People going on about the moral high ground or holier than thou stuff make me laugh. I am making an argument. I think it's fair to say my outlook on life is negative and that includes myself. The game is pointless and full of waste, and acknowledging that is hard.

I believe.

You've also said, at other times in the thread "I think".

Then you've equated those statements with the word "fact" and made judgements on those who act differently to yourself.

Beliefs, and thoughts are not the same thing as facts and, once you accept that you've come to a conclusion that is not necessarily the one and only logical, correct conclusion given the "facts" to hand then you'll understand why the vast majority choose to eat meat and dairy when you do not.

Your assertion that your conclusion is the only logical one that can be made, and anyone who concludes differently is acting illogically, and selfishly, is one which is always going to royally piss off the majority, who don't agree with you.

You're not "making an argument", you're making a judgement. You're judging people as being morally, and ethically, inferior to yourself based upon beliefs and thoughts you've decided are actually undeniable facts.

It's offensive to those of us who hold differing views to your own that you believe us to be "lesser" because of it.

 

[peoffrey]

My vegan and vegetarian friends don't preach their beliefs to me and neither do I preach my beliefs as a meat eater. Make your mind up and shut it.

 

[BlueTangerine]

I believe.

You've also said, at other times in the thread "I think".

Then you've equated those statements with the word "fact" and made judgements on those who act differently to yourself.

Beliefs, and thoughts are not the same thing as facts and, once you accept that you've come to a conclusion that is not necessarily the one and only logical, correct conclusion given the "facts" to hand then you'll understand why the vast majority choose to eat meat and dairy when you do not.

Your assertion that your conclusion is the only logical one that can be made, and anyone who concludes differently is acting illogically, and selfishly, is one which is always going to royally piss off the majority, who don't agree with you.

You're not "making an argument", you're making a judgement. You're judging people as being morally, and ethically, inferior to yourself based upon beliefs and thoughts you've decided are actually undeniable facts.

It's offensive to those of us who hold differing views to your own that you believe us to be "lesser" because of it.

The facts are that animals feel pain and it is significant. We can appreciate it because we are animals too. Now if you accept those 2 facts and continue to perpetuate the needless suffering then the judgment is made automatically. To those people only, not the ignorant. I know people don't like to think themselves as selfishd, but what are you left with?

I'll post links about pain and neurons and brains and nervous systems later supporting those facts.

 

[Metal Biker]

I'll try to post links later to what I've read and the conclusions it has made me form. All I was really saying was I think animals feel pain and distress and thus you are obligated to extend 'the golden rule' to them. Our Human nature isn't pretty or good and the only saving grace is our intelligence, it would be better if we didn't walk through our shit lives rationalizing our behaviour.

By "shit lives" are you refering to the farmers and often times immigrant workers who toil in the fields, cultivating and harvesting the crops all year round so we can have vegetables to eat? Can you imagine the enormous strain it would place famers under to feed a world population of 7 billion on nothing but vegetable products? No, no you mean the poor moo cow which stands in a field eating grass, chewing cud and defacating all day. Such hardships.

 

[andyhinch]

The facts are that animals feel pain and it is significant. We can appreciate it because we are animals too. Now if you accept those 2 facts and continue to perpetuate the needless suffering then the judgment is made automatically. To those people only, not the ignorant. I know people don't like to think themselves as selfishd, but what are you left with?

I'll post links about pain and neurons and brains and nervous systems later supporting those facts.

But, I take it you'd be happy for all our domesticated livestock to die out from neglect as would happen if people stopped buying meat, find it as absurd as the anti-veal brigade, I'm having some side salad with my chilli beef fajitas tonight to balance things out mind.

 

[west didsblue]

The facts are that animals feel pain and it is significant. We can appreciate it because we are animals too. Now if you accept those 2 facts and continue to perpetuate the needless suffering then the judgment is made automatically. To those people only, not the ignorant. I know people don't like to think themselves as selfishd, but what are you left with?

I'll post links about pain and neurons and brains and nervous systems later supporting those facts.

I'll say it again as you don't seem to be able to understand. The fact that animals feel pain is obvious and not relevant. Whether they feel pain during the slaughter process is the issue. It is by no means proven that animals feel pain when they are being slaughtered and if they do, it is only for a matter of seconds. This is because the slaughter process is designed to drain blood from the brain as fast as possible inducing almost immediate unconsciousness.

 

[Yaya_Tony]

I'll try to post links later to what I've read and the conclusions it has made me form. All I was really saying was I think animals feel pain and distress and thus you are obligated to extend 'the golden rule' to them. Our Human nature isn't pretty or good and the only saving grace is our intelligence, it would be better if we didn't walk through our shit lives rationalizing our behaviour.

what the fuck is the "golden rule" you're still talking through your fucking arse.

 

[Damocles]

I'll try to post links later to what I've read and the conclusions it has made me form. All I was really saying was I think animals feel pain and distress and thus you are obligated to extend 'the golden rule' to them. Our Human nature isn't pretty or good and the only saving grace is our intelligence, it would be better if we didn't walk through our shit lives rationalizing our behaviour.

I'm not "rationalizing a shit life", in fact if anything I'm reaffirming the specialness and the greatness of humanity by their intelligence and consciousness.

Now you've used the word distress there. Flies absolutely DO feel distress, which is a different thing from pain as do many creatures you seem to have on your kill list.
And human nature is not only pretty and good, it is literally the best thing that has ever existed in the entire Universe to our knowledge. It is the foundation of every single human act that has ever taken place and considering we live in an extremely fantastic time to be alive comparative to other humans we should celebrate it as much as possible

 

[Damocles]

The facts are that animals feel pain and it is significant.

That is absolutely NOT a fact. You need to stop thinking that this is. It's a scientific position and not one that is roundly supported.

 

[Matty]

........I think animals feel pain and distress.........

The facts are that animals feel pain and it is significant. We can appreciate it because we are animals too.

So, do you think animals feel pain, or is it a fact?

Do all animals feel pain, or just some?

What is the difference between pain and reflexes?

Would you kill a wasp? How about a pig?

What you've done is drawn an arbitrary line in the sand, based on no scientific knowledge (and the reason I know there's no scientific background to your decision is because there is no defined point at which an animal is deemed to feel pain, below which pain is not felt). You've made a moral judgement call, you've decided "these animals feel pain, and as such killing them is wrong. However, these animals don't feel pain, they have reflexes, so killing them isn't morally objectionable to me". People who eat meat and dairy simply don't draw that line.

Lets assume, incorrectly, for one moment that you're right, and the rest of the world tomorrow has an epiphany and decides killing animals for food, and eating dairy, is morally reprehensible, and stop doing it. What exactly do you think the fallout will be? I'll tell you what, global economic meltdown for one. Tens of millions, across the globe, would be unemployed. The economies of every country on the planet would collapse. Then you've got billions of animals which people no longer need, and no longer have the means or desire to tend for. What happens to the 1.5 billion domesticated cattle? Are they left to roam free? Can you imagine the disaster that would cause? So, do we slaughter them all instead? No, we can't do that, they feel pain, and we'd be morally inferior to the vegans again. Your view point is entirely based around personal feelings and opinions. It carries no moral or ethical weight with anyone but yourself. It does not colour anyone else's opinion of themselves, or imbue you with any kind of superiority to them. It also is coming from a naïve, utopian, kum by yar version of the planet whereby we all live hand in hand, providing for our fellow man, and all decisions have nothing but positive outcomes. It's pie in the sky claptrap.

 

[KenTheLandlord]

So, do you think animals feel pain, or is it a fact?

Do all animals feel pain, or just some?

What is the difference between pain and reflexes?

Would you kill a wasp? How about a pig?

What you've done is drawn an arbitrary line in the sand, based on no scientific knowledge (and the reason I know there's no scientific background to your decision is because there is no defined point at which an animal is deemed to feel pain, below which pain is not felt). You've made a moral judgement call, you've decided "these animals feel pain, and as such killing them is wrong. However, these animals don't feel pain, they have reflexes, so killing them isn't morally objectionable to me". People who eat meat and dairy simply don't draw that line.

Lets assume, incorrectly, for one moment that you're right, and the rest of the world tomorrow has an epiphany and decides killing animals for food, and eating dairy, is morally reprehensible, and stop doing it. What exactly do you think the fallout will be? I'll tell you what, global economic meltdown for one. Tens of millions, across the globe, would be unemployed. The economies of every country on the planet would collapse. Then you've got billions of animals which people no longer need, and no longer have the means or desire to tend for. What happens to the 1.5 billion domesticated cattle? Are they left to roam free? Can you imagine the disaster that would cause? So, do we slaughter them all instead? No, we can't do that, they feel pain, and we'd be morally inferior to the vegans again. Your view point is entirely based around personal feelings and opinions. It carries no moral or ethical weight with anyone but yourself. It does not colour anyone else's opinion of themselves, or imbue you with any kind of superiority to them. It also is coming from a naïve, utopian, kum by yar version of the planet whereby we all live hand in hand, providing for our fellow man, and all decisions have nothing but positive outcomes. It's pie in the sky claptrap.

I think if the animal has a nervous system and sensory receptors it "feels it" (the stimulus that causes the animal to move away), what happens next we are not sure because emotional pain steps in. How it reacts to the pain, individual humans react differently to the same pain. that is something we cannot measure.
There are some animals who we think we can understand because they show what we think are emotions, dogs, horses, monkeys etc etc other usually reptiles show "no emotions" and they are harder to read. The moral animal jumps in here. Nice dog, nasty snake.

 

[Damocles]

I think if the animal has a nervous system and sensory receptors it "feels it" (the stimulus that causes the animal to move away), what happens next we are not sure because emotional pain steps in. How it reacts to the pain, individual humans react differently to the same pain. that is something we cannot measure.
There are some animals who we think we can understand because they show what we think are emotions, dogs, horses, monkeys etc etc other usually reptiles show "no emotions" and they are harder to read. The moral animal jumps in here. Nice dog, nasty snake.

Just because an animal has a nervous system does not mean that it shares our nervous system. As intelligence and other parts of genetics have evolved with humans at the very apex of them developmentally, it would logically follow that we also feel intense levels of pain that animals do not.

The point I'm rather poorly attempting to make here is that we're again guilty of anthropomorphising the animal world. Maybe what we classify as pain feels completely different to an animal? Maybe they feel absolutely no physical pain at all but they use the same sensory perceptions which triggers a "pain response" within them without the actual sensation of pain a bit like how language works in some creatures?

 

[KenTheLandlord]

Just because an animal has a nervous system does not mean that it shares our nervous system. As intelligence and other parts of genetics have evolved with humans at the very apex of them developmentally, it would logically follow that we also feel intense levels of pain that animals do not.

The point I'm rather poorly attempting to make here is that we're again guilty of anthropomorphising the animal world. Maybe what we classify as pain feels completely different to an animal? Maybe they feel absolutely no physical pain at all but they use the same sensory perceptions which triggers a "pain response" within them without the actual sensation of pain a bit like how language works in some creatures?

If it reacts it is feeling it. I agree we may not know what they are feeling but they are reacting and moving away, they feel something.
Stick a monkey's hand in a boiling pot and the the monkey will scream, stick a lizard's tail in there it wont scream but it will shift its tail.

 

[Damocles]

If it reacts it is feeling it. I agree we may not know what they are feeling but they are reacting and moving away, they feel something.
Stick a monkey's hand in a boiling pot and the the monkey will scream, stick a lizard's tail in there it wont scream but it will shift its tail.

Equating reaction and pain is a very bad idea because then you're suggesting that pain requires some form of verbal communication system.

Lizards don't react in the same way as monkeys because they don't have the required biology to scream. Monkeys however scream, exactly like humans do, so we recognise this as pain. Another example of the anthropomorphism of natural biology.