Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
erikhoel.substack.com
Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
1–10 of 83 posts
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#2It really boils down to: "Is humans acting as their squishy biology dictates" good or does our "goodness" derive from striving to be more than that biology?
I'm on the "accept that we are made to eat meat and probably should on occasion" end of the spectrum, but that doesn't make the current state of how we make and consume meat an ok thing. Factory farming isn't a necessary evil, and the level at which we eat meat (and the animals we choose to eat) are evil not just on method, but in costs to our descendants.
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#3The question comes down to this: is a life full of suffering, torture, violence, and misery better than no life at all? For me, the answer is no.
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#4becoming a prey item or a pet is an excellent strategy for human survival in the world dominated by extra terrestial intelligence. As OP mentions, there is vested interest in keeping us around, albeit in some form of domesticated state.
the alternative would be to battle the enemy on equal terms and be inevitably exterminated (i.e, predators in todays world), or exist in some way at the margins of the system our new alien overlords have created and find a way to grift off of it (i.e pests in todays world)
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#5Most humans on earth are essentially already being treated as livestock by other humans... The only difference is that the product is not their meat or their milk, but their "blood, sweat and tears". So the scenario outlined at the start of the article is not exactly hypothetical.
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#6from the first paragraph: "Imagine a dystopian future in which aliens with a taste for human flesh kidnapped a bunch of people from Earth and raised them as livestock on their alien planet. Humans on the alien planet are kept alive “free-range,” able to interact and live their life, but only for their first 20 years. Then they are harvested for food."
yeah, its "The Promised Neverland"
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#7The question comes down to this: is a life full of suffering, torture, violence, and misery better than no life at all? For me, the answer is no.
A meaningful life is impossible without suffering.
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#8The question comes down to this: is a life full of suffering, torture, violence, and misery better than no life at all? For me, the answer is no.
While certainly not the majority, some livestock are actually treated quite well until the point of slaughter.
On the other side, many wild herbivores and prey animals live lives in an almost perpetual state of alertness and fear, just a moment away from being viciously torn apart and eaten alive.
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#9As with every philosophy questions have no answers and every argument is drowned in assumptions.
Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher
#10Are animals people? For most of human history, the answer has been no.
I'm sure that there have always been humans that thought of their favorite animals as people (or similar), but the scientific and social acceptance of animals having consciousness and emotions similar to humans is VERY recent. Look at the pushback that Jane Goodall got for her research for context.
Anyway, I don't have a good ethical argument in favor of eating animal, other than history and my personal rights. This is similar to my feelings on abortion - women have personal rights, but other than that, abortion is not good.
I'm sure people will have problems with these statements, but please consider that I am not trying to change your mind or morality.