Eating meat is good, says the philosopher • Hacker News Board

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#31

Post by bena » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:50 PM UTC

I've stumbled upon some of the same thoughts: cows would be fucked if we stopped eating beef; animals wouldn't give two shits about devouring my ass if the conditions were right, turnabout is fair play; fuck crabs; etc.

But I also recognize some the points raised by vegetarians/vegans: we do eat way too much meat; we do treat livestock horribly; fuck crabs; etc.

And I think the answer is closer to vegetarianism than it is to all meat all day. We should eat less meat and probably far less beef, but we eating some is fine. Especially due to the B12 issue. It's something our bodies don't synthesize and our best source is animal products.

It would also let us slowly cut down the cattle livestock as we wean off of beef to lower levels.

Of course, the problem, as always, is "the growth mindset". That we always need to be improving everything quarter after quarter. If you sold 100 hamburgers today, you need to sell 200 tomorrow. How about we sell enough to be profitable and you know, just like chill the fuck out for once.

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#32

Post by throwaway5752 » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:50 PM UTC

avg_dev wrote: post #17

What a load of rubbish. 1. Plant-based diets are good for the environment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6316289/ 2. Animals are sentient. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494450/ 3. The "thought experiment" is flawed. See https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/eating-meat-is-good-says-the... - good rebuttal here Keeping animals alive in the worst possible conditions on the promise that "we'll do…

Agreed, it's hard to imagine voluntarily embarrassing yourself in public as badly as the author has done here.

"When I went to college and met for the first time a good number of vegetarians and vegans, I used to blow their minds with this argument"

Indeed. That must have really been something. Well, he won't say anything to make us thinks he's positioning this in less than good faith, then?

"Honestly, fuck crabs"

Ok. but...

" but really octopuses are pretty horrible too. Oh, they’re smart, but, similar to crabs, they’re cannibals. They spend most of their time cavorting in a midden pile of prey bones."

Midden pile?

"If your cats were big enough, they’d eat you. Feline fillets are simply turnabout as fair play."

Cats?

"we should obviously be eating hyenas"

I'm done. Seriously, it's this guy https://as.tufts.edu/biology/people/faculty/erik-hoel ? what a waste of intellect.

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#33

Post by resoluteteeth » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

> I’ve written before about longtermism, the idea that future lives carry moral weight—in this case, there will be millions of humans on this alien world that never exist if you choose (b) and abandon them to their fate on the hostile planet.

The idea of it automatically being better to choose the outcome where more future lives will exist seems problematic to me.

If it is better to have animals living miserably in factory farms if it means more future animals will be born (even if those animals will live miserably in factory farms) and that has moral weight, is there also a moral obligation to give birth to as many children as possible even if you are going to mistreat, neglect or abuse them?

I think most people would agree that it is better not to have children unless you will be able to avoid mistreating, neglecting, or abusing them, so wouldn't the same apply to animals?

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#34

Post by dilap » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

avg_dev wrote: post #17

What a load of rubbish. 1. Plant-based diets are good for the environment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6316289/ 2. Animals are sentient. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494450/ 3. The "thought experiment" is flawed. See https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/eating-meat-is-good-says-the... - good rebuttal here Keeping animals alive in the worst possible conditions on the promise that "we'll do…

If you're eating farmed plants, then there is a lot of environmental destruction and animal death/suffering behind that, too.

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#35

Post by axblount » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

avg_dev wrote: post #17

What a load of rubbish. 1. Plant-based diets are good for the environment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6316289/ 2. Animals are sentient. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494450/ 3. The "thought experiment" is flawed. See https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/eating-meat-is-good-says-the... - good rebuttal here Keeping animals alive in the worst possible conditions on the promise that "we'll do…

Not to mention we've bred many species beyond what nature would ever allow. Many broiler chickens can't support their own body weight.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...

> At a mean age of 40 days, over 27.6% of birds in our study showed poor locomotion and 3.3% were almost unable to walk.

And keep in mind we're talking about 60 billion chickens annually.

https://www.humanesociety.org/news/super-size-problem-broile...

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#36

Post by peterbraden » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:55 PM UTC

dsabanin wrote: post #3

The 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.

Actually the article is asking whether a good but curtailed life is better than no life at all. Which is a more interesting question.

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#37

Post by axblount » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:55 PM UTC

dilap wrote: post #34

avg_dev wrote: post #17

What a load of rubbish. 1. Plant-based diets are good for the environment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6316289/ 2. Animals are sentient. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494450/ 3. The "thought experiment" is flawed. See https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/eating-meat-is-good-says-the... - good rebuttal here Keeping animals alive in the worst possible conditions on the promise that "we'll do…

If you're eating farmed plants, then there is a lot of environmental destruction and animal death/suffering behind that, too.

So why add the destruction and suffering caused by animal agriculture on top of that?

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#38

Post by immigrantheart » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:55 PM UTC

> The basic claim, to put it crudely at first, is that eating meat is morally good primarily because it benefits animals.

What is the definition benefit here? Would not being able to live freely, freely choose your food, choose your mate, choose (or chosen by nature) when you die, is benefit?

I'm usually right leaning, but in the issue of the environment, like clean energy and the meat industry, the wood industry, I'm left leaning.

Still not vegan yet though. Really hard to be vegan.

but overall I enjoyed the article.

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#39

Post by throwaway5752 » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:56 PM UTC

dilap wrote: post #34

avg_dev wrote: post #17

What a load of rubbish. 1. Plant-based diets are good for the environment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6316289/ 2. Animals are sentient. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494450/ 3. The "thought experiment" is flawed. See https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/eating-meat-is-good-says-the... - good rebuttal here Keeping animals alive in the worst possible conditions on the promise that "we'll do…

If you're eating farmed plants, then there is a lot of environmental destruction and animal death/suffering behind that, too.

That's a common and unimpressive argument around plant based diets. Short of suicide, is it a choice that causes the least possible harm? Surely it causes less suffering that farming all of those plants anyway, feeding them to other animals that take up more land and cause more pollution, and then killing those animals and eating them?

Re: Eating meat is good, says the philosopher

#40

Post by claudiawerner » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 3:56 PM UTC

disintegore wrote: post #20

avg_dev wrote: post #17

What a load of rubbish. 1. Plant-based diets are good for the environment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6316289/ 2. Animals are sentient. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494450/ 3. The "thought experiment" is flawed. See https://erikhoel.substack.com/p/eating-meat-is-good-says-the... - good rebuttal here Keeping animals alive in the worst possible conditions on the promise that "we'll do…

It's always easier to do mental gymnastics than it is to change one's lifestyle.

I agree, but that's kind of what we do to resolve moral cognitive dissonance all the time, with varying results. Personally it's something I really struggle with, and the questions usually boil down to whether I would be fine living my life wrongly, or if I'll give up enjoyment of my already sad life just to feel good about myself for being moral.

I just can't picture it. 9 hours a day in the office, then I come back home and I just want to hedonistically enjoy all that I can until I sleep. Of course I'm going to want to eat a big steak, watch porn, and listen to pirated music, morality be damned, and I know it makes me a bad person.