Thread 82826859

veganism is morally correct and all people, including robots should be vegan

its morally abhorrent to needlessly kill animals for taste preferences. and since we can be healthy without eating meat, we ought to. just that simple

please explain to me how im wrong. i think this is probably the biggest moral atrocity in the world and always deserves attention

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLTAGOUiqMQ

>>82826859 (OP)
Morals don't real and therefore you don't need to worry about them

>>82826859 (OP)
I'll kill as much animals as needed for high quality animal protein

most people here are of lower consciousness so they cant really come up with anything outside of "it tastes good"

>>82826871
i think this is a very arrogant statement and i think you should be more epistemically humble

a lot of top tier philosophers believe in moral realism, like pdh's in philosophy. infact MOST philosophy professors believe in it. and there are strong philosophical arguement for moral realism like the "companions in guilt arguement" that does sound pretty intuitive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOKw7BceAck

i think this gives us SOME probalistic chance of moral realism being true, and this small chance is enough to justify acting as it it is true, even if we dont know

because otherwise its just arrogant to make this assertions about morals not being real or there being no god or afterlife, etc. we ultimately cant know, so in our ignorance we shouldnt be arrogant and play defensively, which entails acting as if they're true

and if morals are true, then animals deserves moral consideration, and thus veganism is correct

>>82826905
Most meat isn't very good I don't understand the desire to eat it all the time like some people do. Even cheese, which is much more versatile, gets old pretty fast. I could eat oats all day every day without even cooking or flavoring them.

define morality and give me one reason why it exists

>>82826920
>i think this is a very arrogant statement and i think you should be more epistemically humble
Can you touch a moral? Can you see a moral? Can you feel a moral? The answer to all of those is a resounding NO. Guilt is a made up feeling that parents use to control their progeny. The only reason veganism is right is because it's the healthiest possible diet. Morals are obviously retarded things for stupid children who don't understand that self control is superior to acting like a spastic.

>>82826896
but you can get protein and all of your nutritional needs met on a vegan diet. theres lots of vegan bodybuilders and athletes who can compete with meat eaters

"It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that, in adults, appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan dietary patterns can be nutritionally adequate and can offer long-term health benefits such as improving several health outcomes associated with cardiometabolic diseases. Vegetarian dietary patterns exclude meat, poultry and seafood, and vegan dietary patterns exclude all foods of animal origin."

>>82826859 (OP)
>killing other animals is bad mkay
>except when other animals do it teehee
vegans are retards and hypocrites

>>82826939
No because they need dozens of chemical supplements.
Also
>bro just replace your local meat from the farm 5 km away with beans from india and quinoa from peru

>>82826937
>Can you touch a moral?
something doesnt need to be physical to be real
the number 82 is real but it isnt physical. you cant touch the number 4. it exists in platonic heaven, or some non-physical existence, but its real, the same is true for other non-physical truths, like epistemic truths or moral truths

>Can you see a moral?
no. you cant see numbers either, but we can concieve of them very clearly, and clearly see they are real. the same of morals. we can clearly see whens something is wrong, like lighting a child on fire, for instance

>The answer to all of those is a resounding NO
morals dont proport to be physical objects, any more than numbers or epistemic truths. this is a unfair standard of believe, as you dont hold it equally for other non-physical truths

>Morals are obviously retarded things for stupid children who don't understand that self control is superior to acting like a spastic.
and yet most philosophy professors (who have a doctrate on the subject) disagree

>>82826955
>the number 82 is real but it isnt physical
Examples of the number exist. Examples of a moral do not.
>you cant see numbers either
I see examples of numbers all the time. Examples of morals? Never.
>this is a unfair standard of believe
Real things have examples
>yet most philosophy professors (who have a doctrate on the subject) disagree
Degrees in fake things don't mean anything. Just because there are theology professors doesn't mean god is real. Do you have any real arguments or are you just going to appeal to authority?

>>82826859 (OP)
> morally abhorrent to needlessly kill animals for taste preferences
Your very lifestyle kills. And your kills more than some guy eating the meat he buys at his market. Your vegan diets deforests entire country and kills bilions of insects, earthworms and wild animals as a result of intensive infrastructure, your clothes kill animals. You just dont care about these because they arent le heckin cute and fashionable

gonna fire up the grill today, life is good lads

>>82826948
>No because they need dozens of chemical supplements.

we use like 10 times the amount of anti-biotics for farm animals than we do for humans, on a global scale

animals dont make b12; they have to get it from a supplement. and animals get TONS of supplement. you are getting 2nd hand supplements, animals without suplements and heavy anti-biotics will all die or get diseases. they live in filthy living conditions and would be malnourished otherwise

>bro just replace your local meat from the farm 5 km away with beans from india and quinoa from peru
yes, because its wrong to kill, even local killing. beans from india dont cause animals to die like local meat

>>82826972
>Your vegan diets deforests entire country
They do that for cattle ranches not wheat farms lmao

>>82826859 (OP)
It is, but most human have no emphaty for animals or at least to not supporting factory farming, its a miracle we don't kill eacother, its human nature to be selfish and not give a fuck.

Unless lab meat is half the price of normal meat humans will never stop funding animal breeding and killing.

>>82826948
It's less carbon intensive to ship from India to the US than for a farmer to drive his goods into town

>>82826967
>Examples of a moral do not.
sure they do. its morally wrong to pour gasoline on a child and light it on fire, because you were board. this is a obvious moral wrong. just as obvious as 2+4=6

>Examples of morals? Never.
i just gave you one. another great example is the torture of animals for taste preference

>Real things have examples
sure well so do morals

>Degrees in fake things don't mean anything
you cant say morals are real yet say philosophy is fake, because if philosophy isnt real then neither is the statement "philosophy isnt real". thats a contradiction

if nihilism is to be true, then philosophy also has to be true

>>82826979
>beans from india dont cause animals to die like local meat
>beans deforesting entire countries and causing the death of milions of animals, tribes and local people dont cause death because i said it
Here is your moral vegan lmao, okay with killing animals as long as he doesnt see them in his yt videos
>like 10 times the amount of anti-biotics for farm animals than we do for humans, on a global scale
Or you could just stop buying shit meat
>animals dont make b12
Vitamin B12 is present in foods of animal origin, including fish, meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products [5,12]. Plant foods do not naturally contain vitamin B12.
Kek
>they live in filthy living conditions and would be malnourished otherwise
Nah youre just fighting a strawman. Any normal meat from anneighbouring farm and game meat has had the animals live better lives than you

>>82826997
>its morally wrong to
Says who and why is that so? I can take 2 apples and add another 4 and see that there are 6 apples. No action produces any moral "thing" ever.
>i just gave you one
You described an action, I see no moral "thing" existing in it.
>because if philosophy isnt real then neither is the statement "philosophy isnt real"
Philosophy is the "study" of fake shit. Nihilism isn't real either. Shit just exists, nothing has meaning.

>>82826984
>s o y , cashew, bananas, beans, palm oil is totally all for animals and not for my meme vegan diet
Another layer of hypocrisy

>>82826859 (OP)
it has nothing to do with morals? Animals eat each other. That's literally just how the world works. If you wanna deprive yourself of good food just so you can stay on your high horse that nobody gives a fuck about that's your problem not mine.

>>82826859 (OP)
Do you regret becoming a eunuch? What have the complications been?

>>82826994
>less carbon intensive to burn entire forests in india and ship them on the most polluting thing on earth than for a cow to naturally life in the fields
Its not. Youre just making shit up to justify your cognitive dissonance

>>82826972
>And your kills more than some guy eating the meat he buys at his market
i dont think thats true. the problem is that farm animals eat a metric ton of grains. i takes like 12 kilos of corn or s{}y to make 1 kilo of a steak. if you just ate that corn yourself it would of been much more efficeint

> Your vegan diets deforests entire country
im pretty sure the leading cause of forrest deforestation is the meat industry

>>82827022
What are you talking about? I'm not even vegan. Cattle ranches are just a shit waste of space. The calories per acre are abysmal.

>>82827034
It is. Those container ships carry a fuck ton of stuff. The carbon per kg of shipped material is extremely low. It is actually more efficient to ship across the ocean than to ship in trucks.

>>82827027
>it has nothing to do with morals?
im inclined to say it does? it would seem wrong to needlessly kill animals for taste preference, in the same way its wrong to shoot dogs for fun, for instance

>Animals eat each other
yeah sure, but were not wild animals. we are humans. we dont get out morals or behavior from wild animals. wild animals rape eachother and kill their own children. does that make it okay for us to do that too? i dont think so

https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/animals-eat-animals

>That's literally just how the world works
sure, but i think the idea is that im making a normative statement that it ought not be so. just because it is, doesnt mean it ought be that way
just because the world is a horrible place, doesnt mean it should be that way. im saying it shouldnt

>>82826859 (OP)
I suppose there is a bit of a difference between mom I'm 12 nobody likes brocoli. Maybe that's made out of long pig. If there was a line it was before I knew there was.

>>82827035
>12 kilos of corn or s{}y to make 1 kilo of a steak. if you just ate that corn yourself it would of been much more efficeint
Obvious vegan bullshit, animal herding is much less consuming than whatever exotic shit your ship from the other side of the world
https://www.inrae.fr/actualites/quelques-idees-fausses-viande-lelevage#:~:text=La%20communaut%C3%A9%20scientifique%20consid%C3%A8re%20qu,le%20contexte%20fran%C3%A7ais%20(2).&text=Plaquette%20indiquant%20que%20l'%C3%A9levage,parfois%20des%20chiffres%20non%20comparables%20!
>beef causes nonexistent deforestation in western europe
>but my vegan diet which causes deforestation and massive extinction all across the globe is okay because i said so
/thread
Vegans are hypocrites
>>82827037
Not everyone lives in brazil/paraguay and eat s o y from this area
99% of farms in my country are small holdings

>>82827087
>99% of farms in my country are small holdings
What shit hole country do you live in? It doesn't even matter if they're small holdings though, the calorie per acre is still shit. Grain, potato, and legumes are the most efficient way to feed the populace.

>>82827087
i do believe it must be the case that meat is worse for the environment than beans and lentils, simply because of the logic behind them

the problem is that the animals you eat MUST eat grains, and thus lose alot of the calories of this food when they transfer that energy to make their body or for their organs to function

>>82826859 (OP)
Meat makes me feel alive without it I probably wouldn't want to live anymore. It's the most natural food a human can eat.

>>82826920
>a lot of top tier philosophers believe in moral realism, like pdh's in philosophy. infact MOST philosophy professors believe in it
>>82826955
>and yet most philosophy professors (who have a doctrate on the subject) disagree
Appeal to authority.
Im a sub80IQ NEET and im smarter than your phds

Humans can't function properly without eating animals. It's the circle of life and all. You can't mimic the nutrion and the effect of meat with chemicals and plants, you just can't.

>>82827309
the implications that aliens from outer space can't do what we're doing here is deeply profoundly somewhat bothering me.

>>82827078
its not just for taste preference, meat is nutrtious so we eat it. idk where you heard that meat isn't necessary but it literally is unless you wanna have nutritional deficiencies and spend an unnecessary amount of money on a bunch vegetables and plant based shit that isnt even going to keep you full for the next hour. Also in case you arent aware humans are animals. Yeah we're not wild animals but we are intelligent animals. At least intelligent enough to know the difference between eating meat and raping and killing our own children. or so I thought.

>>82827330
Now that I think about it, maybe we were the exetra terrestrials all along and holy shit I bet those fucks were really excited that we weren't this way.

>>82827339
So these animals you're taliking about are going to add a carbon tax to offset stuff for the good of their planet?

>>82827352
you know instead of not doing that maybe everyone agrees they get turned into onions green.

>>82826859 (OP)
I mean yeah, its not fair. I like to imagine a society with vampires or ghouls from tokyo ghoul or something. Humans would be appalled by these "monsters" killing their kind and they'd try to genocide. But its just the way that it is. If I was targeted by a ghoul, I probably wouldn't be happy about it, but I'd understand. Life isn't perfect at all. Its just the way that it is. Personally I think its some kind of purgatory limbo or just hell.
We take advantage of animals weakness.
Even if I wasn't extremely malnourished, I probably wouldn't stop eating meat entirely, but I am grateful that I have the privilege to eat it, and plants too.

>>82826859 (OP)
I comprehend why you say this, but the vast majority of crop farming and especially specialty vegan crops like onions avocado etc kills as many if not more animals than meat farming even if we ignore bugs. The amount of animals killed in say california for growing tofu such as mice rats tortoises hares rabbits etc far outnumbers the amount of animals killed in meat production per head so unless you admit you value there lives less there is not solid argument for that. Sure organic farming is obviously less violent, but that is barely used for most consumption assuming your american, and even in places such as britain where it is more common it still often has animal farming where natural grass and forage is enough causing animal farming to be just as uncruel being practically on a similair length to owning a pet which youll never convince people to give up.

God literally gave us animals so that we could eat them.

>>82827266
>Appeal to authority.
i dont think appealing to authority is ALWAYS unjustified, right?
so like, i honestly havent read a single study about how smoking is bad for you, but i just appeal to authority when making decisions because presumeably someone smart did

we do this in all aspects of life, because unless we have godlike power, we cant know everything

the same is true for complex philosophical issues. and since its PLAUSIBLE, considering that most philosophical authroties take morals seriously, we ought to do so, simply based on the chance of it being real. its a case for behaving as if moral realism is true based on epistemic humility

>>82827309
thats not true. the adventist vegetarians and vegans are part of the "blue zone group" of people who live past 100 often. they live just fine without meat. much lower rates of diabetes and high blood pressure as well

>>82827376
sorry i dont know why the hell i said onions i meant onions and plant milk not fucking onions retarded me.

>>82827392
being this new is actually refreshing to see

>>82827401
fuck everyone is going to know i am a newfag

>>82827330
>>82827343
yeah thats a good point!
humans wouldnt be okay with aliens treating us the same way we treat pigs and cows, and yet we still do it because we are stronger. its kind of hypocritical in a way

maybe artificial intelligence if it takes over the world might see this. we might not be the top predators indefinitely!
maybe it would be wise to go vegan in the face of ai so you can say "oh, see i went vegan please dont hurt me"

its a real posibility! this guy did a great video on the subject its so rare to see sensible thinkers doing thinkie things

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSD-U0LK47g

>>82827390
>but i just appeal to authority when making decisions because presumeably someone smart did
>we do this in all aspects of life, because unless we have godlike power, we cant know everything
>the same is true for complex philosophical issues. and since its PLAUSIBLE, considering that most philosophical authroties take morals seriously, we ought to do so, simply based on the chance of it being real. its a case for behaving as if moral realism is true based on epistemic humility
P-zombie ahh moment
Also most smart people arent vegan

animals would eat us too if they could so fuck em

You are, of course, correct.

The only reason why meat eaters get so worked up about veganism is that they KNOW they're morally wrong and that they should make the small sacrifice to stop the cruel and unnecessary suffering but they're too lazy. The mental dissonance causes them to lash out and team up together.

It's exactly the same cause as circumcised people being angry at uncircumcised, they know they've lost our but if they admit it to themselves they're vulnerable to negative emotions. Much easier to be angry than sad or guilty.

>>82827613
>they KNOW they're morally wrong
Still cant prove it. SAD!

>>82826859 (OP)
You literally need to take supplements to stay healthy that's just to tell you how veganism isn't natural

Also Hitler was vegan so:
Vegans = fascists

>>82826859 (OP)
Death is part of the world, get over it. There is no solving it. The animals will die. You eating onions won't prevent their deaths. Vegans don't solve anything. The animals that would have died still die, and not only that, their death goes to waste because no one eats them and whatever they were used to produce is thrown in a landfill.

The world will never be ideal. Death will never be eliminated.

Not only that, you kill plants when you eat them. Plants are just as alive as a pig, or a cow, or a chicken. You aren't morally superior by eating plants, you're still a murderer.
Get over it.

>>82826925
>I could eat oats all day every day without even cooking or flavoring them.
Sounds to me you have a horrific palette for food. Oats are bland in most cases or revolting mush at worst.

>>82826939
>vegan bodybuilder
Are steroids vegan?

>>82827013
You got him good, he couldn't even respond to the trvth nvke

>>82826859 (OP)
>robots should be vegan
Man actually I agree with that. Computers powered by animals would give me the willies.

>>82826859 (OP)
It's just too risky going on an ultra restrictive diet that cuts out the majority of what we would usually eat on a natural human diet. There are plenty of things that can't be derived adequately or at all from a vegan diet. Supplementation is worse than natural foods as they lack other natural compounds that help with digestion (with mechanisms we might often not even understand as nutrition is far from solved)

I am not vegan because I think honey is tasty. I like honey. I like going to the honey store and tasting all the honey and picking my favourite. honey isn't vegan because it's made by bees but I don't see the moral issues with eating it since it doesn't hurt the bees and it benefits the flowers and it's tasty. I am vegetarian however because I don't like meat it seems gross to eat dead animals. I also enjoy some milk products but I don't see the moral issues with that; I go to the local cow farm and say hi to the cows and they seem happy and I'm happy. I disagree with the American and Chinese style large dairy farms in America and China however where they pack them in very tightly, that is mean for the cows.

>>82826859 (OP)
Eating animals make my tummy feel good and it's yummy and makes me feel content and at peace afterwards so, that's enough of a reason for me to do it :). I've also killed animals before and verbally insulting an actual human feels worse, so it's not a lack of empathy. You have no idea how much of a non-issue you're hiperfixating about.

>>82828648
Would you buy it if it was human meat anon?

I need meat and animal fats and their collagen to keep my skin and body healthy. Do you fault a tiger for eating meat?? I am worth more than a tiger.

>>82828653
I've just clearly stablished a boundary between humans and walking food in my post. No, you won't get me to sound like a psychopatic murdered just because I enjoy eating meat.

>>82828674
What is true of an animal that if it was true of a human would justify eating the human? I'm a meat eater btw your argument for eating meat just struck me as weak

>>82828689
It's a quite weak argument, yes. I don't feel like it needs a grand justification, it's just our purpose, as we're apex predators. The same way you wouldn't need a very complex or convincing argument to justify craving sex, I assume.

>>82826859 (OP)
>we can be healthy without eating meat
Children and teens need to eat meat to grow properly. So no. Meat is essential

>>82828704
Well yeah justifying a craving is super simple but people generally struggle when they have to justify genocide. Like you don't even know why it would be wrong to do it on a human vs an animal

>>82828725
Well, I can go sort of in-depth on the topic if you really need me to. For the record, I don't condone factory farming because of the horrid conditions the animals have to endure, which is so insane that it makes the quality of the food subpar. It's common knowledge that healthy animal=healthy food so ya, I don't support genocide either. We can't eat humans because of many reasons, as we've built our society off religious morals that forbids us of things like killing each other, mainly to keep us under control. In nature, tribes killed and ate each other all the time, cannibalism was also common practice, etc. so I guess the only reason I wouldn't eat humans is because we live in a society. There's next to no difference between animals and humans, except humans actually need each other to survive and reproduce, so there's that.

>>82828749
Ad reductio you would eat humans we can end it there.

>>82826859 (OP)
I dont fucking care about your stupid take, I just had some beef and I fucking enjoyed it bitch.

>>82828764
You said it like you wouldn't. At least let my arguments sink in.

>>82826859 (OP)
>debate me
no. i am wholly unmoved by the death of animals to feed humanity. i could not care less.

On one hand, I do salute you for TRYING to be a better person.
On the other hand, I don't think your moral framing makes sense. You have arbitrarily decided that it's immoral to kill and consume animals but moral to kill and consume plants, which are also living things.
And let's not go into the fact that your lifestyle (living in civilization, using running water, electricity and the Internet) is about as deadly and cruel to animals as eating meal is, if not more.
Again, maybe you can be praised for choosing to sacrifice a little bit instead of sacrificing nothing, but you're just compromising so I don't see how you're "morally correct". You're trying but you're not there.

>>82826859 (OP)
Vegans are 100% right, there is no argument against veganism so people always resort to "It's muh choice1!!1111!!" and try to say offensive shit to try and provoke you in order to feel like they have a victory over you because they know their 'choice' is inexcusable.

>>82828961
bringing this up when someone gets mad i rape a girl

>>82829076
Yes, you're right. More meat for us, thank you.

>>82826859 (OP)
Moral in the sense of "we don't think it's good to torture things that can feel pain like we do"? Yes. Factory meat farming is some kind of domesticated livestock hell. It's horrifying on any level. Even after the animals are dead the meatpacking industry is a puke-inducing dangerous hellscape for humans too. It's all just awful and hasn't changed that much since The Jungle.

Was it immoral to domesticate them in the first place? I'm going to say no, not really. Hunting is hard and risky so penning a beast and breeding it to be a docile pile of food was a smart solution to the hunting problem. Permanent settlements took us out of the roaming lifestyle and let us sit and think so we could get to this point where we can argue over morals instead of foraging for scraps.

In return, the creature gets a relatively easier life and doesn't have to worry about predators or starvation, although it will die in a similar way to a hunted animal (it doesn't know that). We deliberately bred them for stupidity and obedience so they more or less are no longer anything like the wild species initially tamed and letting them go now would just mean their extinction.

>>82829076
Except, regardless of what you, or anyone else does, your choice as a vegan has no change on the outcome.
If you release the animals they'll die of starvation, be eaten by a predator, die in a territory dispute, then be eaten by a bunch of maggots and vultures and shit, etc.

So, exactly who are you saving? Apart from yourself, that is.

>>82829099
May your primordial truth win.

>>82829120
>the creature gets a relatively easier life
A much worse life in every metric.

>We deliberately bred them for stupidity and obedience
Ah yes that's why they need enormously heavy metal constructions to hold them down as they get artificially inseminated or branded without anesthetic.

I am only answering you because you asked. I have no idea why you persistently want people to challenge you, is your ideology mayhaps tormenting you?
First, vegan diet can only be nutritionally complete if it includes products like almonds, cashews, avocado, onions and many other exotic(for northern hemisphere) beans. Production of all of those crops however is associated with multitude of ecological and ethical concerns and actively harms humans. We do feed some onions subproducts to cattle but this is not actually necessary for meat production, however it is necessary to overproduce all that shit if veganism became the norm. I am not choosing animals who are my competition for resources on earth over humans who are my potential brethren. Protein and fatty acids are expensive in nature.
That aside, I do not truly care personally about my health or the taste of meat.
I find veganism morally wrong because it
a) puts humans above other living beings as the ultimate metric of morality
b) Denies living organisms their inborn right to stand up for their own interest and with that -
c) most vegans deny life itself
The last part is not official of veganism ethics but in practice 80% of vegans are antinatalism cultists. They seriously will say shit like it's better to genocide all cattle than to just improve the conditions on which we utilize their produce.

P1

P2

Energy within space is limited and in order for life to exist it has to steal it from other living stuff. That is the fundamental rule of life and we are not above it. If a lion has the right to eat meat, so do we, we are equals before god. Exactly because we cannot bypass that rule. If you claim that lion eating meat is also wrong (some vegans do) then you are denying life itself. Again. Which I think is morally wrong.
It is also not ethically correct to decide for others what they value. USA should really try to grasp it for once with all their immense failures in spreading "democracy". When organisms don't like their conditions they fight back, in the most desperate situation, with a suicide. There are animals that do not interact with humans and are even aggressive towards them and we let them be. Animals are not helpless. Humans themselves have many times stood against foes with crazy power advantages, sometimes lost but it doesn't matter, their choice was death or enslavememtand their choose death. I believe animals are intelligent and sentient but that says nothing of the way they perceive the world. If they dont do anything about their situation then I conclude they just value having food and shelter above some other stuff. Humans also sometimes choose enslavement for those reasons by the way. If they don't wanna fight for their interest, it is in fact their choice and you are wrong for assuming you know what their choice should be. For fucks sake, even plants fight for their interest and utilize all sorts cunning for it. But pigs can't? Note that we are talking about systematic stuff, not accidents. Accident cannot be fought by their own definitions, but systems can.

>>82829224
>a) puts humans above other living beings as the ultimate metric of morality
what constitutes a moral actor in your view

P3
My third is point is more personal. You are coward and failure and hence why use this whole moral debate to console yourself that you are not part of all of it and instead a part of something good. That at least something in this life you did right and better than others. The truth is, you are just running away from being part of humanity and of this world. No animal will thank you for your sacrifice, only humans can define and notice your action as good, animals are not spiritual cuckolds like that. Grow a spine. My mom is like that and there is no sight more pathetic. Suffering is not all what life amounts to. You just choose to suffer in this particular situation, by stubbornly refusing to accept the nature of life. Death is necessary and pain is temporary. You are making your suffering ever present for yourself when turn away accepting the truth. You don't own anyone to hurt yourself for their sake and neither do they owe that to you. And making such threads is by the way, a for of self-harm, as is constantly watching animal torture.

>>82829170
I was referring to like the early neolithic era to pre-industrial revolution. The 10000 years or so when everyone was a subsistence farmer if they wanted to eat food.

>A much worse life in every metric.
Are you aware of how often wild animals starve and how much meat a predator has to consume to live? Grazing without fear is a step-up from constantly fleeing from wolves since they have to eat one of your herd every 2-3 days to survive.

>artificially inseminated or branded
I said they were too stupid to survive in the wild, not a zombie with no amygdala that can feel no pain.

>>82829245
Morals are entirely subjective depending on what human society needs. They exist for social cohesion and to mediate interpersonal conflicts. So I'd rather answer what is "good".
I think evil doesn't exist in true due to my second point, baring some very extreme situations, however true good does exist. A "good" action is that of willful sacrifice. Rest is neutral, basically just selfishness. It is unreasonable however to force anyone to abandon their selfishness, it is their inborn right, hence why it can't be evil.
It's great when people are selfless but it's not a requirement. The only moral requirement I'd uphold is that you ought to not fuck over people who did good to you. Most humans living in society have received some level of good from their system so it's appropriate to respect your environment and give a bit back.

>>82829308
Then what constitutes a sacrifice and what makes it good?

>>82826859 (OP)
Meat tastes good and we evolved to eat it. It's simply the natural order of thing.
I am not a fan of factory farms that are overly cruel to animals, I try to buy local.

>>82829308
Also I don't think you got what I mean by moral actor. I just mean someone that can make moral decisions. Or good decisions if you prefer the term. Not a good person.

>>82826859 (OP)
Morality is a social construct, you can shove it up your ass alongside muh feelings.
>we can be healthy without eating meat,
Wrong, retard.

>>82826925
>Most meat isn't very good I don't understand the desire to eat it all the time like some people do
>most meat isnt good
your opinion
and not surprised you cant understand that other people like it.
>>82826871
also this. there is no morals in killing for food
its just happens because it is the way it is in nature

>>82826859 (OP)
I also vegan* but you're annoying enough that I don't want to associate

>>82826859 (OP)
I actually believe before pig get electrocuted it raised and socialized within so future piggy will live for a time

Is this the same vegan guy who posted here years ago? Or is it a new one?

>>82826939
enlighten me on how to feed my 7"0' tall ass at least 250g of vegan protein daily without getting constipated

>>82826943
When tf did OP say he thinks the natural violence of the world is a good thing?
I don't think a single vegan has ever said this lol

>>82827424
It's understandable to not be okay with aliens feeding on humans, but why do you moralize it?
You can fight to survive an alien invasion without condemning their actions.

>>82826859 (OP)
God himself prefers meat over veggies.

>>82826859 (OP)
It is good to inflict pain and horror on animals because I enjoy it so much. Limiting harm is done to improve the balance of suffering and joy in the universe and I just love it so much.

It'd be a crime to stop

>>82826859 (OP)
Plants are living beings as well and feel pain.

>Inb4 you take back your appeal to morality and relativize by claiming plants have less value as beings so it's ok. Animals have less value than humans so it's ok.

/Thread/

>>82826859 (OP)
I feel weak and sickly on vegan diets. I only feel and look good when having enough red meat, not even chicken or fish but red meat. Getting proper nutrition is not evil and nutrition science is filled with unrepeatable speculative nonsense and not dependable compared to experience.

Morality is not a prime directive, but rather a luxury. Stealing is wrong, but if you are starving to death then ofc you steal. Killing is wrong, but if lives are in danger then ofc you kill. Morality is something you can only afford to worry about when your primal needs are fulfilled. In this case, health is a primary need, ergo you sacrificing health is incorrect to meet a moral need but rather you only worry about morals after your health is secured. This is why it is alright to kill an animal for food, but why it is immoral to waste food or to inflict harm outside of food needs, etc. Morality is secondary to primary needs and proper moral concerns reflect accommodation for primary needs.

>>82830698
What anime is that girl from? Tell me please

>>82826920
Philosophy isn't real either, or rather it's gay and full of inconsistencies.

>>82826925
>oats
Bro literally enjoys eating cardboard over meat.

>>82830552
The issue is the belief that humans aren't natural or violent.

>>82827424
You want to defend your friends but kill your enemies??????? How evil?

>>82830754
Pic related's anime, Watashi ni tenshi. You will recognize a lot of anime images once you watch it.

>>82828725
Universal morality is retarded. Why is it ok to kill trees or veggies?

>>82830698
I try to eat meat once/twice a month which I think is the minimum for health. You actually *feel* it rejuvenate you if you haven't eaten it for a while. hard to justify more though

>>82830977
I can literally feel the rejuvenation too, and my skin and hair and muscles and everything start improving promptly. I don't get how vegans deny it. But I need it more often, just after like a day or two I don't feel as light and good. If meat wasn't so expensive right now I would be eating it every day, I swear it's a conspiracy to make it so expensive because people in power know humans need it to function optimally.

>>82831113
>>82830977

>I can literally feel the rejuvenation too, and my skin and hair and muscles and everything start improving promptly. I don't get how vegans deny it

the problem with annecdotes is that they ought not to justify your belief entirely. a lot of people swear they feel great and have no negative side effects from smoking. be it pipes, cigarettes, tobacco. but due to epidemiology we know that smoking does increase those things

the same thing is true for meat. processed meat is a class 1 cancer carcinogen, and regular meat is a 2A cancer carcinogen

and of course, if eating human children would make you feel good, would that make it morally acceptable? what about dogs? just because it makes you feel nice doesnt mean its morally acceptable

>>82831794
Everything causes cancer anon, breathing causes cancer, should we stop?

>>82830834
my post didnt argue for universal morality though? trees dont have phenomenological experience

>>82831902
I'm a panpsychist so...

OP you have to consume some sort of life to survive no matter what. You are just a gay nigger who thinks some is more acceptable than others. Not to mention your shitty vegan diet requires using all sorts of land that would otherwise be the animal's habitat. Maybe you should cut to the chase and the logical conclusion of this train of thought and kill yourself.

>>82826859 (OP)
Eat as much as you require, not more. People in the modern world overconsume and even throw away food and waste it. There is nothing wrong with eating meat but you should respect the animal that gave its life for it.

>>82831972
Even if its a human you didn't like?

>>82831989
I don't understand your question. Unoriginal comment.

>>82832017
Learn to read nigger!

65

>>82832027
Nonesensegerald.

>>82826859 (OP)
Veganism is fine. But fuck you for telling people how to live, cunts like you should be forced to live the way they dont like because of the shit you spew.

>>82831794
Anon what the fuck are you talking about
It's about the animals, It's been about the animals. Every day I choose to eat worse food and be less healthy so they may have better welfare. It is a form of discipline.

"it's actually healthier", "it tastes better". What do such obvious lies accomplish? Who are they for? And the constant fucking guilting, This shit is why I don't want to associate with you, You're the most miserable group on earth

>>82831113
>>82831794
also i should say
im not trying to downplay that you feel better because of meat, but that you can get all the same nutrition from plants. so maybe its the case that theres something in meat that was relieving a nutritial defeciency you have

in that case, you should go vegan, and then do blood work and see what you are lacking in, and just suplement. for myself, i take a vitamin d suplement because i never get any sun, a b12 suprement, and a k2 suplement. k2 comes in my vitamin d pills. also a iodine suplement. thats it

when i fast i take magnesium and potasium salts as well

>>82831825
>should we stop?
well i think you should stop meat on moral reasons, because its wrong to needlessly cause animal suffering. and since you can be healthy and meet all of your nutritional needs on a vegan diet with proper supplementation, when you should do that, and you should not kill animals for taste preference

>>82831964
sure, i do think that simply by existing you will cause some harm and take up resources that some other being could of used. but i think the idea behind being a responsible person is not not needlessly cause horrific suffering and death to the innocent, which includes animals. and since meat is nutritionally needless, we ought avoid it, as it does cause a lot of harm

>Not to mention your shitty vegan diet requires using all sorts of land that would otherwise be the animal's habitat
to get the same amount of calories, a vegan diet takes up a lot less land, as shown in this picture

>>82832100
>But fuck you for telling people how to live, cunts like you should be forced to live the way they dont like because of the shit you spew

the problem with this like of thinking is you hold vegans to a higher standard than anyone else

the thing is, as humans, the vast majority or even ALL of our moral beliefs first come other people. first we get the ideas from other people. be it from a teacher, a book, a youtube video, casual talk, and then we reflect on it and wonder if its right or not

"slavery is wrong"
"killing babies for sun is wrong"
"rape is wrong"
"abortion is wrong"
"migration is wrong"
"white genocide is wrong"

all of these are just normative claims about right and wrong, and as humans, we do this all the time, when we talk about politics, which are all just moral issues

veganism is the same thing. its just talking about animals, but you get ALL of your beliefs and ideas from other people, unless you are one of the very rare person to have an original thought and propagate it

you didnt invent calculus, you learned it from other people
you didnt invent modern medicine, you learned it from other people
its literally how we learn ALL things as humans, from other people, and this includes moral issues

>>82831972
>There is nothing wrong with eating meat but you should respect the animal that gave its life for it.

but how can you respect an animal by killing it against its will, for taste preference?
i didnt want to die. it wanted to live. how is it respect to kill this animal, because "haha meat tastes gud"

it didnt voluntarily give its life any more than a theft victim "gave" away all their money. it got forcibly taken away from it, against its will

these animals cant consent to being killed. you are trampling on their will and autonomy by eating their flesh

>>82831794
In addition to feeling great, there is concrete evidence such as skin state, suppleness of muscle/body, lack of bloat, etc. Also while "feeling" can be subjective, mental clarity as well as elevated mood are still observable non-subjective effects.

>processed meat is a class 1 cancer carcinogen, and regular meat is a 2A cancer carcinogen
Good thing I focus on regular meat, but everything processed is definitively cancerous compared to normal variants, take any bread for instance and compare bakery-made versus processed brands.

>if eating human children would make you feel good, would that make it morally acceptable? what about dogs? just because it makes you feel nice doesn't mean its morally acceptable
My point was on tangible health benefits, not emotional feelings nor tastes. That said, I'm not against eating dogs for food but am against abusing them. And for children, obviously not but that's because I'm a human and other meat is fine for health. If I was a tiger or a vampire or some form of beast which requires it this entire discussion would probably be different, but as a species which evolved to survive cannibalism naturally is riskier than any other form of food so isn't even a hypothetical case to suggest to a human.

>>82832113
>but that you can get all the same nutrition from plants.
Not entirely the case as many plant foods contain chemicals which harm the efficiency of absorbing the nutrients they have. Of which our bodies do not have the proper enzymes to break them down and absorb properly, since we're naturally carnivores adapted to pre-digest meats through cooking. The fact you have to take a ton of supplements is sort of building the case that you're not meant to go on a vegan diet naturally. Furthermore with differences of compounds of the same nutrients, bioavailability, your own gut flora's state, there are a lot of differences in effectiveness between the same amount of nutrients take by supplement versus by food.

>>82826920
>i think this gives us SOME probalistic chance of moral realism being true, and this small chance is enough to justify acting as it it is true, even if we dont know
Come on, anon. You're too smart to make such a leap... but you did, so now I have to explain why that's bad:

So what if one determines that there's a greater probabilistic chance of moral anti-realism being true? And let's please not appeal to consensus to assess truth, even probabilistically, because the buck stops with your conversation partner's reasoning capabilities, and not the popularity if a view; which is why you'd expect any argument or appeal to work against them in the first place.

I think empirical observation of the natural world, especially relating to biological evolution; combined with inferences one can make from those about the development of moral thinking in humans and other animals, firmly grounds morality in contingencies of nature rather than abstract, immutable, eternal "truths" that are typically employed to make the case for moral realism.

>>82832113
You haven't made a convincing moral argument anon, you just keep loudly asserting the same thing over and over. Bad bot!

>>82832266
>>82832252
>>82832250
>>82832155
say a racial slur

>>82826859 (OP)
power > morals
I could bring up 6 million more issues about humanity and morals. who cares? how much they care?
Nature.

>>82832385
If it's morally superior, why should I adopt it? Do I even have that concern? You are speaking for me.
Should I be the most morally superior?
Are you?

>>82832266
>>82832297
Why, think I'm AI?

Nigger.

>>82832422
Are you that fart-huffing philosopher from yesterday? I've calmed down but I'm a bit curious how you work now. You do understand winning on a technicality doesn't actually convince anyone in an argument right?

>>82832484
Is that your goal? Convincing people?

>>82832484
I don't believe in debating. neither your opinion nor mine will change.
But when you started the argument, you were already speaking for me.
You gave me a personality.
I need to start the discussion from a certain point, based on the role you have given me.
-
Of course eating meat is violent, animals are suffering. But is it wrong?
Who are we in this planet ?

>>82826859 (OP)
1. Honey is volentary and ethical, from a symbotic relationship between beekeepers and bees, and consuming honey makes you not a vegan, so being not a vegan is technically fine.

2. Due to the way our food distribution systems are set up, meat is often the most nutrient dense food that's cheaply available. My dad has colon cancer, and he can't get nutrients properly unless he eats meat because his gut is fucked up and they had to remove much of it.

3. Replacements for, say, leather are rich with microplastics and nanoplastics and pollute the world and cause much more problems than the leather industry ever did, which was always just extra. Depending on your exposure, you, right now, have a plastic spoon's worth of plastic hanging around in your brain.

4. I'm still skeptical that all animals experience suffering the same. Bugs, for example, specifically meal worms, there should be no problems with us eating.

5. Much of the Animals we eat wouldn't have lives if they weren't bred to be eaten. They do not have the intelligence to advocate for themselves, and as such this is the best we can offer because how else are tgey going to pay rent? The cruelty is due to bad governance.

6. The act of being personally vegan or not does little to actually change things since the meat industry is a systemic problem. An animal advocate and generious doner who eats meat does way more for actual progress than 10 vegan combined, who frame the problem as a personal choice and shift the blame away from the real culprit behind us as a society eating so much meat.

7. Human supremacy is an important thing to maintain, especially with the rise of AI. Nature, as a whole, has done way worse for the world than humans ever did. All that we theoretically have to do is do better than nature eventually, and from a utilitarian lense it will have been worthwhile. Humans could and currently are moving towards a future where animals don't have to suffer as much as in the wild.

>>82826859 (OP)
I'm not a vegan but people should'nt expect to eat meat everyday or very often and there shouldn't be psychopath trying to give a ton of meat for the whole population everyday. That's a lot of killing for people that don't necessarly deserve it (niggers & retards)

>>82829250
I'm not really a part of this debate but I want to ask something unrelated.
I detach myself from people often and am constantly searching for the reason and reasons as to what makes me so isolated or 'different'. I delude myself often, probably a cope, but I struggle to figure out if I'm doing this to myself, or its already done and is only the reason I do things.
i don't know why but I feel like you'd have an answer to give

>>82832648
>Honey is volentary and ethical
problem is its exploitation. in a similar way that breeding dogs for profit is exploitation. but honey is a grey area. grey areas dont make it morally okay to kill pigs for bacon. the whole point behind veganism is a respect for animal wellbeing because animals are important. greys areas dont invalidate non-grey areas

>Due to the way our food distribution systems are set up, meat is often the most nutrient dense food that's cheaply available

thats not true, anon! beans and lentils are just as nutritious and provide protein and are very cheap and are less straining on the farming and food distribution systems! you are factually wrong, i do believe


>Human supremacy is an important thing to maintain, especially with the rise of AI
its kind of ironic you say that, because soon enough with ai, it will take over the world and humans wont have any power. and you wont be able to be on top of the food chain abusing power anymore. maybe it would be smart to go vegan now so you can say to ai "um, im was a nice boy, so dont be mean to me please" perhaps?

>The act of being personally vegan or not does little to actually change things since the meat industry is a systemic problem
thats actually not true. over enough time it does make a difference, it just takes enough time. its a supply and demand situation
peter singer adresses this in the first minute of this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLl3vEGU49Q

>>82832297
haha i dont mind if you think im a bot hahaha

>>82826859 (OP)
I totally agree, but fuck fish, i will eat all the seafoos i want

In my perfect world, we can perfectly recreate the meat of any animal without growing the brain, but idk how far away we are from that

but ive been vegan for 8 years

>>82832996
well, fish can feel pain and they have a brain and a nervous system

fish may be ugly and kind of alien, but i dont think they deserve to suffer or die

if you want to get the benefits of eathing fish i suppose you can eat Bivalve Mollusks, which (from my understanding) no not have a brain but do have nerve ganglia
they behave as if they experience pain in the same way that other animals do, but do not have a brain
i personally think thats a more positive move forward than eating fish which do have a brain, but its possible that nerve ganglia itself is enough to produce sentience, so i am against eating of bivalves, but i suppose its better than eating fish

>>82832942
to be honest, i read your post, and i have ZERO answers for you. sorry, but sometimes the real world is not satisfactory. you can try plugging your post into various llm's like chatgpt or claude or gemini and maybe they'd give you a better answer

but im autistic and unstand straight forward things, not vague cloudy things. im not good at reading people or situations. im very simple
>it seems like animals can suffer and feel pain
>consciousness is uniquely important in the domains of morals
>thus animals should get some moral consideration (enough not to hurt them needlessly)

and no im not an ai bot i type everything....
only time i use llm's is when i post the entire thread and get it to rate all the reponses, i like to read about what it thinks about me (usually its good)

>>82826859 (OP)
Why do you want validation so much? You aren't wrong.
>i think this is probably the biggest moral atrocity in the world and always deserves attention
Personally IMO the biggest moral atrocities in the world are the ones committed against me

i ate some vegan cornettos today and they were very nice

We need to address the phenomenon of vegan girls/vegetarian girls ignoring their male counterparts

Their existence and their implicit betrayal pretty much spells out the doom of veganism to begin with. There will never be truly vegan households on a cultural level. The genetic instinct towards compassion for animals will get bred out.

>>82833502
79% of vegans are female, there aren't enough vegan men to go around.
I went to an animals rights protest and I had a few women be really interested in me despite being an autistic retard, I'm not fat and have an average face

>>82826859 (OP)
why do women try to push their prescence on all boards lately? You are a fucking pest, get the fuck out

>>82826859 (OP)
You're not wrong anon. But i only value humanness. No i dont care about pets, humanness is my requirement for moral consideration, now eating meat as well as continuing to incentive the mass production of slaughter and death through supply and demand doesn't contradict my morals at all anymore. WHAT NOW FAGGOT

>>82833566
>WHAT NOW FAGGOT
nothing, veganism is about appealing to peoples current moral framework, most people care about animals but ignore that when talking about the animals we eat

>>82833558
Interesting anecdote retard, here's mine, I was vegan for 6 years and every vegan/vegetarian girl I met either turned me down or ignored me.

We should start eating vegans.

>>82833616
even if you ignore the anecdote it's still a fact that 79% of vegans are women, so most vegan women cannot find a vegan partner

>>82833635
Let's see the statistics of how often vegan/vegetarian women date/marry out of their ingroup

>>82833723
yes most vegan women with partners are forced to be with non-vegan men or just be alone, what don't you understand about 79% of vegans being women?

>>82833616
im vegan for 7 years already and you dont go vegan for pussy
females are hypergamous and only love high smv guys. chads, normie guys, etc. the black pill is still in effect

one time i went to a protest where they were protesting pigs in back of a truck going to a slaughterhouse, i was the only male there, and i overheard the girls casually talking about sleeping with the police officer once and sleeping around with this and that person. theres tons of sluts on either side of the fence. just how it is

>>82833502
yeah, when they're young they are easy cumdumps for meat eating chads, and when they get old, they either abandon veganism to live in a normie meat eater, hold on to their veganism and marry some normie cuck who is accepting of it, or settle down with some vegan beta

theres still dating hierarchies and winners and losers, etc. its like christian girls who go around fucking all sorts of men when they're young, and once they're old marry some devout cuckold. its a cold game, honestly. just how it is

it doesnt really matter to me because im a wizard, but still, for sure, its not like veganism itself will get you pussy. dating is about power and smv, and if you are powerless here, its not happening

>>82826859 (OP)
the difference between man and animal is as great as that between civilisation and the tribe. as the civilised man is superior to the tribal primitive and has dominion over here, so too does man have dominion over the animal.

>>82833558
Oh good I'm a fucking onions now. The more I know the more I hate being part of them

>>82833742
The way you're framing it makes it sound like all 21% of the males are partnered up.

>>82833800
>and you dont go vegan for pussy
I didn't go vegan for pussy. I stopped caring about everything entirely for lack of human connection. If life really is how atheist vegans claim it is then there's no point in compassionate universalism.
>the black pill is still in effect
Why bother then.

>>82833812
>superior
On what metric?
An actual savage would hold dominion over your city slicker ass and it's not even close

>>82833884
moral and intellectual superiority.

>>82833800
what's the thing in the top left of the yes column?

>>82834022
Getting outmaneuvered by savages makes you morally and intellectually superior?

>>82834064
savages succeed through their lack of intellectual values and brute strength. obviously intellectual values are values that make life more difficult, not values that make life easier

>>82834085
If you were smarter then your life would be easier

>>82834115
only a base, savage form of intelligence used for making things. the refined, civilised intelligence only exists to make life harder and more difficult.

>>82834131
The ESL chatbot is disintegrating after encountering the logic bomb it seems

>>82834172
what the fuck are you talking about dipshit retard fuckface

>>82832978
>but honey is a grey area. grey areas dont make it morally okay to kill pigs for bacon.
Okay, but it does make it okay, even good, to not be a vegan. Honey eaters are not vegans.
>thats not true, anon! beans and lentils are just as nutritious
They aren't. They lack a lot of micronutrients such as that found in sardines, and their protiens aren't high quality and need to be consumed with other protiens to make full ones. This also didn't adress how lentils tear up my father's guts when eggs don't.
>very cheap and are less straining on the farming and food distribution systems!
Even if this is true, being vegan isn't going to fix that. Society is apready set up with businesses and infastructures for farming meat. They're going to find a demand.
>its kind of ironic you say that, because soon enough with ai, it will take over the world and humans wont have any power.
AI is both a reflection of humanity and a bubble. It wouldn't exist or be nearly as powerful without US HUMANS to train on and it's importance and use is being pushed HARD right now. It's not profitable or sustainable.
>thats actually not true. over enough time it does make a difference, it just takes enough time. its a supply and demand situation
Veganism is still the slowest most inefficient way possible to make change. The guy is talking about how over the course of your LIFETIME sometimes maybe your choice to not BUY(not eat) meat will reduce the percieved demand and thus supply of meat. You're putting the majority of the blame on people's personal choices, when you, hypocrite that you are, don't donate to orgainzations that actually work to disrupt the meat industry. Donating 200 dollars and eating meat all year is probably more efficient. You're playing into the meat inustry's hands by allowing them to make it "your" responsibility when they're the ones doing all the crazy abuse to animals and running the show.

>>82833884
>I stopped caring about everything entirely for lack of human connection
well okie dokie but thats still morally wrong
>huh i didnt get my way so its okay for me to hurt innocent animals
sorry thats not how morals work
maybe there will be some kind of afterlife, maybe ai will become super intelligent godlike and there will be a judgement day. maybe there will be sexbot robowaifus or something. we dont know. its still intelligent to go vegan and STAY vegan, both for objective moral reasons, and for a pascals-wager on the offchance that your behavior could possibly be rewarded

yeah i mean life is bleak, but you're not the only one okay. im a wizard vegan, but its like, in such a situation you can only swim or kill yourself, and i think everyone has good reason to live because of the upcoming sexbot waifubot revolution, so just stay alive and be a moral person

i dont know if atheism is right or not, but i am a reluctant theist, and i think probably SOMETHING is out there, like maybe karma or reinarnation, and just because you dont get pussy doesnt make it okay for you to hurt innocent animals. go back to being vegan, its the right thing to do. dont become what you despise in the world

>If life really is how atheist vegans claim it is then there's no point in compassionate universalism.
there is on the offchance, however small, that god or reincarnation or karma or cosmic justice exists. thats a good enough reason to act on your moral convictions

>>82826859 (OP)
I do not believe animals have any moral value like humans do so there is no morally wrong act with people who eat meat.
I'm willing to listen if you have something else.

>>82834247
they are sapient and it's plain fucked up to hurt them if you can avoid it. If you kick cats for fun I can't help you. If not you should at least vow not to waste meat as a minimum show of respect

>>82834247
i think the problem with this line of thinking is what exactly is human and animals?
maybe the lines are supposedly clear right now, but historically they werent. blacks historically were not human. does that mean that slavery was right when blacks were not human?

what about the evolutionary link between the great apes and humans? such beings died hundred of thousands of years ago, but what if we got their dna and revived them?

would it be okay to kill and eat them?

it just sounds like you conveniently pick a point in the line thats self-serving (humans) which is very convenient because it allows you to kill sentient animasl like pigs, which are more intelligent than the average 3 year old

>>82834225
>well okie dokie but thats still morally wrong
Was I arguing that it was morally right? I said I stopped caring.

>maybe there will be some kind of afterlife
Hardly any human religions, especially ones relevant to the potential soul of a white European, would demerit me for eating meat. If we're going to Pascal's wager,
1. if some savage non-european paganism is right then I'm fucked anyway because their gods hate me or I'm some kind of biomass without a soul.
2. If the European heathens are right then I'm probably fucked, not for eating meat, but for being a dishonorable incel. If Odin is drinking fermented milk mead right now in Agartha do you think he's happy with me yapping on 4chan about how vegan girls turned me down in highschool? Thor would use me as a golf ball on the spot
3. If Christianity is right then that's the best case scenario because at least the slave morality reward of living a shithole life will be rewarded in heaven and I'll get some incomprehensible cosmic orgasm
4. If Gnosticism and Occult Satanic shit is right, then I'm simply fucked anyway, being alive within matter is being cursed in the first place
5. If atheist communists are right then I'm fucked anyway because my one life I lived on earth was dogshit

>maybe ai will become super intelligent godlike
Thinking like this is the reason the bubble still exists.

>and just because you dont get pussy doesnt make it okay for you to hurt innocent animals
It's a lot more than just "not fornicating." The human brain has so-called "reward circuitry" which I find interesting, because, where are the rewards? For anything? No amount of being right or doing good goes anywhere or does anything. In fact sometimes all it does is just draw attention and suffering to you.

>>82826859 (OP)
Don't you have another dog to shock on stream hasan? Brb going to go fap to the taste of the burger I just ate desu

seething brownoid

>>82834247
>>82834365
It is not a human morality, it is a base, primitive morality that anything with a nervous system shares. You are a living being that shares the same world, there is a minimum amount of dignity that is required towards eachother; the recognition we are all alive.

>>82834416
>Hardly any human religions, especially ones relevant to the potential soul of a white European, would demerit me for eating meat

yeah but thats not the only possibilities, yeah? i dont think i referenced reveled religions like judeo christianity or islam. i referenced things like karma, a natural philosophical god (god from natural theology), a cosmic host from nick bostrom thought experiements, an asi, karma/reincarnation

these are all posibilities, and ought to be taken seriously.

> if some savage non-european paganism is right then I'm fucked anyway
oh yeah. it possible that there is no justice or that god doesnt exist or whatever. for sure. we dont know

>If Odin
oh, i dont know much about paganism, but this is only one posibility

>Thinking like this is the reason the bubble still exists.
recursive ai represents a very interesting hypothetical of a near godlike being that could be born in ourlifetimes. i linked this video earlier and it discusses it in nice detail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSD-U0LK47g

again, the hypotheticals on what is possible you listed are NOT exhaustive, you ignored the possibilities i stipulated

>i dont care
ok. if you dont care it kind of ends there. i think going vegan on the offchance that morals could be rewarded punished is a very serious position. this is why i actually went vegan in 2018
and also max tegmark, who is a mit physics professor! hes very smart (much smarter than me) and went vegan for the same reason

https://www.singularityweblog.com/max-tegmark/

you dont have to be this perfect moral angel, you just have to see that its quite rational to behave in a moral fashion in your otherwise hopeless position

>>82834468
im not brown. or female, sorry
i honestly feel ashamed of my race that white men are the least likely to go vegan and care about the animals
its quite horrible these people are smug about the suffering they cause animals. what a horrible world we live in

>>82834365
>>82834384
>>82834580
I understand your points but it's pointless because they are all about making one's feel guilty and I don't feel guilty about the killing of animals because they aren't humans and that's that. Doesn't matter to me how smart they are or how much they suffer.

>>82834966
That's cold but it's also weird we don't all think like you evolutionary speaking

>>82834966
do you think we should give animals any sort of moral consideration in anything we do?

I mean the amount of suffering on the planet is staggering, I can't think about it or I'll go insane. I'm sorry that animals are suffering, so are millions of humans. I try to limit what animal meats I eat to like cage free or free roam. I agree it shouldn't be this way, but I don't see what I can do about it besides trying to be a somewhat ethical consumer

>>82835116
we're not asking you to do anything to stop it, we're just asking you to stop paying for it

>>82835066
Probably comes from the disconnect people have with their food now.
>>82835083
I'm not sure I understand your question. I do not see any moral value in animals as I said before.

>>82835116
Become a eunuch!

>>82835254
>I'm not sure I understand your question
I'm just asking for clarification if you think we can do whatever we want to animals with no limits

>>82835357
Yes and no. I don't think people should get rid of wild animals because that can have far reaching consequences to the environment that we don't know of. I don't think someone should be allowed to hurt or kill the animal of someone else. If it's your own private animal then I think people should be allowed to do what they want.

>>82833353
>but sometimes the real world is not satisfactory.
Suppose this is an answer in itself. Well, hopefully I find something eventually or learn to give it up.

Why should I refuse to eat animals that would surely eat me

Animal welfare is secondary to my racial welfare
If the former is solved i could go vegan overnight

>>82826859 (OP)
Your argument assumes morality has objective weight -- that suffering is actually wrong, not just unpleasant to you. But in a godless, material universe, "right" and "wrong" reduce to personal preference or social consensus.

If there is no transcendent moral source grounding those values, then saying veganism is morally correct has no more ultimate meaning than saying you prefer it. Without objective morality, all worldviews (including yours) collapse into nihilism.

>>82826859 (OP)
The morality of meat is one thing I disagree with you but there's a least a argument to be had but milk and especially eggs I don't see why vegans have a issue with it

Also I think it's funny how I've never met a vegan that wasn't also super left-wing woke and they can never explain to me why killing a animal is murder but killing a literal human baby isn't

>>82836284
>but milk and especially eggs I don't see why vegans have a issue with it
im not OP or a vegan but I already know his response to this
its because the dairy industry is even more brutal than meat
if you looked into it for more than 2 seconds you could clearly see this

>>82836292
How is the dairy Industry brutal?? Because they artificially inseminate the cows to stimulate milk production.. Also s address my second question

>>82836151
>But in a godless, material universe, "right" and "wrong" reduce to personal preference or social consensus

not necessarily. we can have objective truths that arent predicated on god's existence. one such example is math. the number 8 can exist, be entirely non-physical. this a perfectly rational and commonly held belief amongst athiest philosophers

likewise, you can have beliefs about morals being objective and true without a belief in god. this is also very common. infact its the dominant view of philosophy professors

>If there is no transcendent moral source grounding those values
there doesnt need to be, in the same that that theres no transcended source grounded the number 4's existence. it just exists out of its own necessity. and if thats the case, then so would moral truths

>Without objective morality
i do think morals are objective

>>82836361
You can say morals exist like numbers, but numbers don't tell anyone what to do (the number 8 doesn't care if you ignore it)

Morality however comes with obligation, it tells us what we ought to do. That's the is/ought problem: describing what *is* doesn't explain what we *ought* to do. If there's no conscious source behind those rules, then who or what is actually doing the "obligating"? Saying moral truths just "exist" doesn't explain why anyone should follow them.

>>82836481
>but numbers don't tell anyone what to do (the number 8 doesn't care if you ignore it)
huh?

i think moral facts and mathematical facts are different. numbers dont proport to be normative in nature. they proport to state mathematical truths. likewise, moral facts are normative in nature and do proport to describe the moral reality

obviously, these are 2 different things here

>describing what *is* doesn't explain what we *ought* to do
yeah sure, but by definition, moral facts are normative, and describe what we ought to

>If there's no conscious source behind those rules, then who or what is actually doing the "obligating"?
to the facts themselves obviously, in the same way that math dictates discource in the things it proports to describe, ei numbers and measurement and such

>Saying moral truths just "exist" doesn't explain why anyone should follow them.
well if they exist then obviously it trivially follows that you ought to follow them
and if you want to debate on meta-ethics, well, desu i find such conversations immensely tedius. there are much better people online to debate it, like sampson vs jonas olson (who wrote a textbook on nihilism/moral error theory)
ig you just have to watch them and see which one you find more intuitively appealing. such debates are common, because not everyone agrees
im not here to defend moral realism, although i do believe in it, and i think its a serious very very much worth considering

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZIwJrNpx_g

>>82836507
You're basically just saying moral facts are "normative" without explaining why they actually obligate anyone. Facts don't tell people what to do.. only minds can do that. Saying "if they exist, we ought to follow them" is just assuming the point you're trying to prove. Existence alone doesn't create obligation.

Without a conscious moral source, "ought" loses its grounding and there's no real reason anyone has to follow those supposed truths.

>>82836562
>You're basically just saying moral facts are "normative" without explaining why they actually obligate anyone
what do you mean? it trivially follows that if objective moral truths exist, then everyone with moral agency is obligated to follow them

>Facts don't tell people what to do
thats not true at all. normative facts would proport to, in fact, tell people that to do

and the same is true of epistemic facts
"the degree of evidence justified the degree of belief"
this is also a objective truth from epistomology, that is normative in how people ought to structure their beliefs. there are other objective truths from epistomology that also are normative in that they tell you how you ought to believe

>>82836880
That's still circular, you're just defining moral truths as "things we're obligated to follow." The question is why they obligate anyone.
Your analogy to epistemic norms doesn't solve it, because even those depend on a goal we choose (being rational). if someone rejects that goal, the "ought" loses authority.

Facts can describe order, but they don't command obedience without a conscious source or purpose behind them.

>>82826859 (OP)
you're absolutely right. but atm im vegetarian. i can tolerate growing hens and eating their eggs I couldn't butcher an animal myself so thats why I won't eat meat animals anymore

>>82836338
>How is the dairy Industry brutal?? Because they artificially inseminate the cows to stimulate milk production
what happens to male calves/chicks? what happens to milk cows after their prime milking years are over?

>Also s address my second question
im not a vegan, thats a question better addressed to OP.
but I would assume because they think a fetus isnt a human being and are anti-natalist in their very nature

>>82826939
>Vegan food
>Look inside
>Jewish food
I guess this proves that we have NO CHOICE but to kill animals

>>82837662
>>Jewish food
you do realize at least 2/3 of your diet is 'vegan' by nature?

>>82837903
>at least 2/3 of your diet is 'vegan' by nature?
Proof ? I mostly eat meat and animal products so itd be a surprise desu

>>82837920
>Proof ?
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/charts-of-note/chart-detail?chartId=81864&utm_source=chatgpt.com

>>82837941
Cool. Im not merimutt though. I mostly eat meat, as everyone around me.

>>82826859 (OP)
God created animals to be eaten by humans.
Why is it bad to kill animals to eat them?
Yes their lives are full of suffering and pain, but that is also the case in nature. The billions of cattle in this world would simply stop existing if everyone were a vegan. All life is suffering, the alternative to that is merely non existence.

Veganism is closing your eyes to this reality:
If only I can have no part in it, then I wont have any guilt!
What is worse is that you focus on this cruelty and evil of killing animals and ignore all the other sins of man - and most of all: of you!
In essence, you are trying to create a new man made law in order to be just.
However the judgment of God is already clear since ancient times:

And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Genesis 6:5-7 KJV

And therefore God killed all animals and all people of the earth except for Noah.
Because Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
The only reason with wretched world can contribute to exist is because Jesus Christ paid for all the sins of his elect on the cross, and so the world is continuing and god is bearing it with the greatest possible longsuffering so that the rest of his sheep may be found, saved and perfected.
That is the only way for you to find salvation.
And veganism is a mockery, you are mocking Jesus by saying that you will make yourself clean by refusing to eat meat.
But you cant. You are a sinner and you deserve eternal damnation in hell.
But Jesus calls you to follow him into life, and there is no other way except through him.

>>82829250
>>82839107
These are the correct responses to OP in this thread.
All of his talk is reducible to vanity and pride.
The only way how you are going to do no harm in this world is if you never existed at all.
Not even killing yourself would be without harm because you would ruin the lives of your parents and everyone who has to deal with it.
You are a child, acting spoiled. Grow up.
Veganism is a temper tantrum and vanity and pride.
It should not be respected nor even taken seriously.

You can have all your nice moral highground arguments, but at the end of the day God will throw you into hell to burn for all eternity because of your evil.
And this shit about veganism will not get you off lighter, but because of how self richeous and vain it is you will because of that get an even greater and graver punishment in hell and the fire will be ever greater and more devestating.
And the smoke of your torment will rise up from eternity to eternity.
And there is no salvation for you except if you repent and accept Christ Jesus

>>82834864
>i referenced things like karma, a natural philosophical god (god from natural theology), a cosmic host from nick bostrom thought experiements, an asi, karma/reincarnation
Without traditions, how do you give them any credibility? I can just make something up and it's just as possible.