Quote:
Originally Posted by Xurtio
But then what if we considered a new claas of victims? Would it be ok to eat a human because you were hungry or is it more morally acceptable to kick a human because you're angry? Assuming the human was killed in a sanctioned industrial fashion, of course.
To me, it's more taboo to eat a human, whereas with animals it's more taboo to kick them. We've grown up eating animals so we're comfortable with it... which kind of makes morality more about personal comfort than an intellectual/spiritual journey.
Whereas ethical vegans consider the suffering and death of animals as morally negative regardless of personal comfort. Of course, there are probably hedonist vegans, too, that are grossed out or disgusted or horrified by death and meat and really only avoid it out of personal comfort.
|
i think personal comfort is the mechanism by which morality is enforced... not the ultimate end that inspired us to evolve it in the first place. if that were the case we would be better off without any morals at all.
like for me... i can see why factory farming is brutal and probably wrong, and why my eating of meat and thus financially supporting such a brutal system is immoral. i don't lose sleep about it because i just don't care that much. there are plenty of things i know that are immoral that i would do and not care. which is more being amoral than anything else. which is not a good thing but i would be dishonest if i pretended to actually feel bad when i don't.
Linear Mode
