Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

rollingstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 211 posts

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#161

Post by famousactress »

Jgrubb wrote: post #103
famousactress wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I mentioned it because the conversation is about eating meat, not because I need you to think I'm awesome. In fact, I think the joke has some very relevant truth to it. I think heralding veganism is a ridiculous mission from a practical standpoint, and lots of people and organizations are spinning their wheels converting a tiny fraction of the population to a totally meatless diet when instead it makes so much m…

I totally agree with you on every point, except for the one about heralding veganism being ridiculous. I don't think it's ridiculous at all, especially when I look around at the average morbidly obese guy here in Northern NJ, and then go to Thanksgiving out in Michigan with my wife's family and the meat eaters are in the minority. Everyone at Thanksgiving looks amazing and healthy. I think the greater and more meanin…

I said it was ridiculous from a practical standpoint. My hyperbolic language probably muddied my point. I'm only saying I see much more value-leverage in putting energy into reducing meat consumption than eliminating it. If nothing else, it's an obvious first step.

There are a lot of problems with pushing an agenda as extreme as veganism. It defines itself prohibitively, instead of positively. It says "I don't eat meat" instead of "I eat vegetables". That's off-putting and turns the conversation quickly into one about absolutes and morality. I think that's a super high-cost, high-friction path to changing behavior from a practical standpoint.

Further, I worry about the constant association with veganism and health. It's far from my field of expertise but it seems to quickly lead to pretty boolean discussions about whether meat is good or bad for you, and those discussions don't resolve very clearly. I'd rather we talk more often about the fact that the modern meat and dairy industries are completely and irrefutably destructive to the planet.

[Edit: See Zike's excellent response to your comment for a perfect example of what I'm talking about above.]

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#162

Post by vlod »

WalterSear wrote: post #142
vlod wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even long-term vegans have difficulty in getting complete nutrition on their diet which is offered almost by default in a basic omnivorous diet. You over estimate the difficult, yes it's a little more work. Heck you can say the same thing about the current US omnivorous diet. Most omnivores have problem getting sufficient nutrition (in the form of fruits, veg and Vit.D) in their diet. It's not that they can't get it…

Tip to non-vegans: you too, are likely to be running a vitamin B12 deficiency, along with the vitamin D one. Tip to vegans: Hey! I thought you were going to have at least a little popcorn with that.

> Tip to non-vegans: you too, are likely to be running a vitamin B12 deficiency,

Thanks for pointing that out and it's really what I meant. My Mrs loves her popcorn this way (although she eats meat).

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#163

Post by contextual »

nine_k wrote: post #95
contextual wrote: post #26

If the suffering of animals matters, then eating meat is morally wrong. Animals are non-human persons who are aware of their own existence and who feel a wide range of emotions, just like we do. Killing animals may still be acceptable in western society, but it's wrong. It's wrong just as slavery in the United States in the 18th and 19th century was once acceptable but wrong. Just as hanging, drawing and quartering t…

To soothe you I could say that it's advances in technology that will lead us to eating meat without killing animals. Currently lab-grown meat is ridiculously expensive, but so was everything new, before it got to industrial scale. When factory-grown meat takes over the shelves of meat departments, cow and chicken population of the world will dwindle significantly. Only milk cows and egg-laying hens will remain, along…

Shame on you for trying to distort the precepts of Buddha. Stop embarrassing yourself!

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#164

Post by nimble »

epochwolf wrote: post #138
asciimo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You presuppose that torture is always willful. In the context of human-scale meat production, it seems unavoidable. Yet we accept this, as it is necessary for consumer demands. The employees of factory farm facilities may very well suffer "emotional depravity;" not as a prerequisite for their duties, but as a result. The nature of torture aside, taking the life of a sentient being is the ultimate violation of its rig…

Animals are not sentient. Higher animals have some form of emotion and a great capacity to suffer but as far as we can tell today, they do not have self-aware and self-reasoning intelligence.

Sentience doesn't mean what you think it does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#165

Post by contextual »

epochwolf wrote: post #138
asciimo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You presuppose that torture is always willful. In the context of human-scale meat production, it seems unavoidable. Yet we accept this, as it is necessary for consumer demands. The employees of factory farm facilities may very well suffer "emotional depravity;" not as a prerequisite for their duties, but as a result. The nature of torture aside, taking the life of a sentient being is the ultimate violation of its rig…

Animals are not sentient. Higher animals have some form of emotion and a great capacity to suffer but as far as we can tell today, they do not have self-aware and self-reasoning intelligence.

Psychology Today: A Universal Declaration on Animal Sentience http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/201306/u...

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#166

Post by bane »

WalterSear wrote: post #158
bane wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Heck you can say the same thing about the current US omnivorous diet. Most omnivores have problem getting sufficient nutrition (in the form of fruits, veg and Vit.D) in their diet. It's not that they can't get it, it's just that they are a little lazy. Pretty much agree, but the kinds of nutrition omnivores lack are absurdly easy to get even by accident. But then again, you had to put a nutritional tip in your post…

>Socially, it's also highly irritating to be around. Since most Vegans are converts to the life-style, it's like any other recent convert to a chosen life-style (religion, fitness, chosen computer platform, etc.), endlessly inserting it into every conversation and constant moral chastisement to self-justify the difficulties of their chosen life-style to those that honestly don't care in the least and have better thin…

I upvoted you for putting me into your shoes. I don't have much sympathy for people who get upset because their chosen life-style is difficult or inconvenient or socially awkward, but I'll definitely try to make better small talk to my vegan friends in the future.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#167

Post by nimble »

asciimo wrote: post #72
epochwolf wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very act of torture requires a level of emotional depravity that merely killing does not.

You presuppose that torture is always willful. In the context of human-scale meat production, it seems unavoidable. Yet we accept this, as it is necessary for consumer demands. The employees of factory farm facilities may very well suffer "emotional depravity;" not as a prerequisite for their duties, but as a result. The nature of torture aside, taking the life of a sentient being is the ultimate violation of its rig…

> The nature of torture aside, taking the life of a sentient being is the ultimate violation of its rights. I don't see how any act less than killing can be considered morally worse than killing.

Why?

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#168

Post by bane »

swombat wrote: post #140
chollida1 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nature is not morally right. In fact, nature is amoral. Pointing to nature and saying "nature does it so it's ok" is a bit like pointing at a landslide and saying "nature does it so it's ok to build my house like this". It's meaningless. Completely agree here, luckily I never made that argument:) I basically made a tongue in check throw away remark > Killing any kind of sentient creature whose death could have been…

Everything's debatable! But there are pretty strong arguments for "killing sentient beings is wrong". Most morality stems from the Golden Rule (treat others as you'd want to be treated). If we take that as a given (a reasonable non-controversial starting point imho), then we can easily agree that breeding and killing other humans for food is immoral. The Golden Rule is generally applied to a small subset of sentient…

> It's pretty reasonable to predict that, unless things go very badly for humanity, eventually many animals that we currently breed and kill for food will come join us on the safe side of the Golden Rule. We may start with the more inspiring or cuddly ones like Dolphins or Whales, but can you doubt that humanity from 500 years in the future will consider eating a dolphin as abhorrent as we would consider, say, eating someone's pet labrador?

Interestingly, humans rarely live as a solo species. Most concentrations of humans are part of a larger menagerie of symbiotic utility and pest animals that rely on human existence and activity and despite the constant presence, it's rare that those animals ever enter even the most carnivorous human diet outside of very specific cases.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#169

Post by vlod »

robomartin wrote: post #139

Cruelty is, of course, despicable and should be stopped. The vast majority of growers are decent and moral. It's easy for activists to find and focus on bad apples and make it seem like all meat suppliers are criminal monsters. This is simply not true. This would be like meat eating activists finding bad actors in the farming industry to then acuse the entirety of that industry with criminal behaviour. Ridiculous. As…

> The vast majority of growers are decent and moral.

Really? I think a lot of these decent/moral farmers are getting replaced by huge corporations that are only interested in profit.

>Drop two people on an island.

Sigh This point is taking it to an extreme. Yes, I'm a veggie/vegan becz of the environment I'm in. Put people on an island and most likely everyone will turn into a raving beast (aka Lord of the Flies).

>The omnivore could easily ingest all the energy and nutrients needed to function

Are you some crazy survivalist? I would guess not. Also most of the (let's say US) population couldn't survive. Most people get their meat from fast food restaurants or else packaged in a supermarket.

Scenario, you land on a desert island. You don't have a gun or a knife. You think the mass population could trap and kill a wild pig? You need training to do something like that. Even something smaller like a wild bird or some sort of rodent is not easy.

Then there's the question of having to cook it. Do you think most of the population can start a fire without matches?

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#170

Post by theorique »

coldtea wrote: post #93
gambiting wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't. You equal animal life to human life, hence your statements like "Would it be moral to kill you if I'd let you live in a decent, stress-free environment before your death?". I do not find them equal - I find animals worth carrying about, I would like them to have decent lives, but ultimately - they are food and if they are killed quickly and painlessly then I don't have a problem with it.

> Not sure if your argument holds. We're essentially food too, so it'd be okay to kill and eat you. Only we have laws that prevent you for doing so, and a culture that says it's bad. Otherwise, have a go at it. Canibals, which lack such laws and culture are totally fine with eating other people.

Cultures in which this was acceptable did not generally do it to members of their own tribe (in-group). It was only something to be done to rival tribe members (out-group) who were defeated in battle. It was an expression of domination and disrespect to opponents.

(At least in Papua New Guinea - other regions YMMV)

Post reply on HN