Philosophical Vegan Forum

Thanks for your reply Armoured,

I find your logic reasonable and can respect your views on being a vegan, I posted a reply other than this one but for some reason it didn't go through, I did try a vegan diet for some time but it was not due to ethical reasons. It was in order to see if it would improve my health any and also to prove you can build muscle without eating meat since I kept hearing I needed protein shakes.. silly. Through out the whole time I constantly had digestive issues but I did feel better in someways. So you're right I'm not totally close minded on the vegan Idea, but it is not for ethical issues.

I can see valid rational in your response, but the vegan lifestyle isn't for me, eating meat feels natural to me, while being on a vegan diet I was never satisfied nor content, one could argue science all day on wether eating meat is in our nature or not but it certainly feels natural to me. It is logical to say not all vegans think a like some do it for different reasons but I do not feel it is fair and proper to be judgemental and claim meat eaters are immoral and uneducated. Ethics could be argued all day by the greatest of minds and could still fail to come to an agreement.

But then you eat poor defenseless plants who give use oxygen to breath?..

A) Plants don't feel pain. They don't have a nervous system.
B) You kill more plants by eating animals, because the animals are fed plants all their lives.

Maybe we should stop progress in society and stop research of all kinds, no longer build onto cities and make technological progress since it hurts kittens some how.

Because we don't eat animal products for ethical reasons, we therefore also would want to stop all societal progress if it hurt a kitten somewhere. What a straw-man.

I do think animals should be treated with respect and dignity but such is life.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

we cannot stop making progress in order to avoid hurting a few members of other species although we do have to be responsible and not abuse our abilites and try to not be cruel which is not always possible.

Who is saying we should stop making progress? You aren't dependent on animal products.

Why would you even try and push your beleifs on eating meat then criticize religious fanatics for doing the same that his hipocritical dont you think?

So anyone with a cause they are passionate about is the same as a religious fanatic? So I guess the people fighting for gay rights in the streets (protesters and such) are equivalent to fundies. Yup, that makes sense.

Again I am an atheist but this is so absurd, you also go as far as censoring the word B..A..C..O..N.. on this forum and replacing the word with *penis* like it is somehow blasphemous, how can you consider yourself rational?...

It was just to troll the trolls.

LogicIsNotRelative wrote:I can see valid rational in your response, but the vegan lifestyle isn't for me, eating meat feels natural to me, while being on a vegan diet I was never satisfied nor content, one could argue science all day on wether eating meat is in our nature or not but it certainly feels natural to me.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

LogicIsNotRelative wrote: It is logical to say not all vegans think a like some do it for different reasons but I do not feel it is fair and proper to be judgemental and claim meat eaters are immoral and uneducated.

Presuming you buy from factory farms, I see these options:
1) You don't know the horrors of how animals are treated on factory farms (obviously, uneducated).
2) You do know, and you fund them anyway, unnecessarily (immoral for funding torture unnecessarily).

Unless you don't buy from factory farms, but I doubt it.

Here, watch this:
http://www.peta.org/videos/meet-your-meat/

Armoured,

Your first response I can agree with, Your 2nd opinion I do not, what I eat or do not eat is not anyone's business until there is a definate set of rules for ethics and morality, I'd love to see this argued between scientists and philosphers alike, not so much philosphers as scientists but meh.

In the end it starts to become an opinion and everyone has one.

LogicIsNotRelative wrote: One could argue science all day on whether eating meat is in our nature or not.

I'm unclear on what you mean by "in our nature." Do you mean that we humans feel instinctively driven to hunt down animals, dig in to their raw corpses with our teeth, and then devour them? I think it's quite clear that humans have no instinctual desire to do this. In the distant past human hunters may have often needed to kill animals to supplement their diet if they faced a scarcity of easily-accessible plant foods. It does not, however, seem as if it's in our psychological nature to desire to kill animals.

If by "in our nature" you mean that we need to eat meat to be healthy, one doesn't need to debate science all day. As I said in my first response (the really long one):

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitions of Canada that, "Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence." The American Heart Association and Mayo Clinic also have similar stances on vegetarian (and fully vegan) diets. Many modern health professionals, such as Neal Bernard (of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine) and Dr. T. Colin Campbell (author of The China Study), are constantly espousing the benefits of a whole-foods, plant-based vegan diet. If you'd like to educate yourself further on nutrition, I recommend watching Dr. Michael Gregor's YouTube channel: nutritionfacts.org.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12778049
https://www.youtube.com/user/NutritionFactsOrg

ArmouredAbolitionist wrote:. It does not, however, seem as if it's in our psychological nature to desire to kill animals.

Not so much to kill, but to eat meat, which is what drove our ancestors to hunt, We instinctively desire sugar which was scarce back then, which causes a problem now being so abundant now. The same way we see meat, may not be true of everyone. Much how we instinctively lust. etc.

I responded to you before, that I agree we do not need to eat meat to be healthy, I totally agree on that, you can get the everything you need from plants no argument there. How did I even imply that I said that we need to eat to meat to be healthy?.

As advanced as you beleive us humans to be we aren't that far off yet. We are still animals with instinct, We are driven by mere chemical reactions and are far from perfect, with flaws in our biology. It is easy to see that murdering and killing is unethical but when it starts to come down to things like eating meat and things it becomes a grey area. At want point do you have a mound of sand? 3 or 4 grains of sand. 50? who has this authority on ethics? Clearly murder, rape is wrong immoral unethical but at this level it is all an opinion.

LogicIsNotRelative wrote:.I responded to you before, that I agree we do not need to eat meat to be healthy, I totally agree on that, you can get the everything you need from plants no argument there.

OK, I understand. Thank you for telling me this.

LogicIsNotRelative wrote: Your first response I can agree with, Your 2nd opinion I do not, what I eat or do not eat is not anyone's business until there is a definite set of rules for ethics and morality.

A definite set of rules for ethics and morality? If everyone waits for something like that to be established (if it ever can be), then I don't see how ethical progress can be made in the world. Change comes from individuals. There is no omnipotent being of infinite wisdom and morality in the cosmos who can or will tell us all how to act. Therefore consensus about ethics must come from exchanging of views between us. In my first (long) response I gave a very thorough explanation of my stance on ethics, and so I'd be curious to know exactly which points you agree and disagree with. I also explained why your morality might compel you to avoid harming animals, but this of course relies on some assumptions about you. That's why I'd like to know what your stance on ethics is, and how it differs with mine.

I realize it's asking much to ask you to read my whole first response, as it's quite long, but if you do then you'll understand exactly what my views are on ethics, and I daresay it's very similar to that of many other vegans.

LogicIsNotRelative wrote:

ArmouredAbolitionist wrote:. It does not, however, seem as if it's in our psychological nature to desire to kill animals.

Not so much to kill, but to eat meat, which is what drove our ancestors to hunt, We instinctively desire sugar which was scarce back then, which causes a problem now being so abundant now. The same way we see meat, may not be true of everyone. Much how we instinctively lust. etc.

I responded to you before, that I agree we do not need to eat meat to be healthy, I totally agree on that, you can get the everything you need from plants no argument there.

natural =/= moral =/= okay

Rape is natural.
Cannibalism is natural.

These things, however, are unacceptable in virtually all circumstances. Meat, similarly, is not okay because it might be natural.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

Ethics at this level are subjective. the only thing i've learned is that being atheist doesn't make you totally rational, I for one will enjoy a nice steak for dinner tonight.. have fun eating lettuce guys.