Submitted by NoNo_Cilantro t3_127no6u in Showerthoughts
EasyBOven t1_jefctyz wrote
Reply to comment by Otfd in Stories with humanized animals are cute. Stories with animalized humans are terrifying. by NoNo_Cilantro
I see. So if someone believes something is ok to do, that means it's actually ok?
Otfd t1_jefewem wrote
Ok is subjective. To you no. To me yes.
In the context of eating animals. Because you equated animals to humans. I equate them to food, even though I could have a pet pig that I love and protect dearly, I would still go inside and eat bacon without feeling anything. Similarly, I could throw some bacon into it's pin and it would eat it without issue.
EasyBOven t1_jefgasr wrote
Similarly, someone could kill and eat a human, or enslave them, or sexually assault them without issue. I'm not sure you'd be talking about subjective morality if someone did those things
Otfd t1_jefkosa wrote
That's your opinion. Those two things are extremely far from being similar in my mind, but if you think that in order to be okay with eating animals or "enslaving them" you have to be okay with that perspective toward humans.
Then I thank god you don't get to choose my perspective.
EasyBOven t1_jefkvk7 wrote
This is your opinion that morality is subjective. Are you now saying that some morality is subjective?
Otfd t1_jeg18rp wrote
Nope all morality is subjective. BUT some are so obviously that they are accepted as fact such as murder by most of society.
EasyBOven t1_jeg1mr4 wrote
Obviousness is inconsistent with subjectivity
Otfd t1_jeg20sd wrote
No. It causes something to seem less subjective, but ultimately people exist who murder and think it's fine. They would disagree, but as a whole it's obvious so it feels like fact.
EasyBOven t1_jeg265h wrote
So you have no argument to those individuals who would murder? It's just, like, your opinion man, that murder is bad?
Otfd t1_jeg2mj0 wrote
This is the issue with people like you. You want to spend hours running in circles trying to make me equate something I think is minor to something I think is major.
I WILL NEVER THINK THAT KILLING AND EATING AN ANIMAL IS THE SAME AS A KILLING A HUMAN. So fuck off and go argue YOUR morality with someone else.
I am two seconds away from doubling my meat intake just to make up for your lack of eating.
EasyBOven t1_jeg3cj0 wrote
I'm just asking questions about your morality.
Either of this things should be true:
-
You have an argument against murder that you would want someone who thinks murder is ok to examine and possibly change their mind, in which case you should be equally open to arguments about treating non-human animals as property
-
You have no argument against murder because all morality is subjective and if some dude wants to murder someone that's their right and we should all get out of their face about it because maybe they're two seconds away from doubling the number of people they murder just to make up for your lack of murdering
Which would you say is closer to your position?
Otfd t1_jeg5tel wrote
Then you should be equal open to treating your water bottle with the same level of respect. Don't try to argue that it isn't living, because those are my morals.
It doesn't matter dude. We pick what we want. But thankfully, society mostly aligns with what I consider the most morally outrageous such as rape, murder, etc.
EasyBOven t1_jeg6qz1 wrote
I'm happy to hear an argument about any moral claims.
How fortunate that in a reality where moral opinions are just random chance and not based on anything real, we find ourselves in a society that matches your morality. There can't possibly be an underlying cause for societies making similar moral decisions
Otfd t1_jegrz0n wrote
Your second paragraph made me laugh. “Based on anything real” dude what part of subjective do you not understand? We have free will. Thankfully, society can mostly agree that killing, raping and a bunch of other stuff is extremely bad. But a whole of us think people like you who take it this far are stupid. We can justify killing and eating an animal. We can’t justify killing a human. You can’t justify killing and eating an animal. I CAN.
EasyBOven t1_jegstdh wrote
This is just an assertion. We don't have to get into the weeds on meta-ethics, but if you want to assert that it's ok to treat an individual as property because "subjective, tho," you're either going to need to concede that you would have to allow people to murder and/or demonstrate subjectivism.
But if you want to circumvent all that nonsense, I'm perfectly willing to have a conversation with you about your moral perspective and see if it can be applied consistently
Otfd t1_jeh1oe0 wrote
Yeah me and 90% of the world will continue to do exactly that. Just like we always have.
You can keep asserting that we have to share YOUR beliefs.
EasyBOven t1_jeh1t6f wrote
Do exactly what? What are you even responding to at this point? Are you making up your own meaning to my sentences now?
KGBFriedChicken02 t1_jefokl7 wrote
Everyone's morals are subjective lmao, it's phillosophy, it's subjective by definition. Eating meat is part of nature. We may take it to an extreme, but if it was so reprehensable and evil, i'd argue it wouldn't happen in nature.
What's fucked up is our lack of respect for the food we eat. The waste, the cruelty of factory farming, that part of it.
EasyBOven t1_jefowvn wrote
I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that "waste" is fucked up, but owning another individual isn't.
I don't need to demonstrate that morality is objective in order to examine your reasoning. Why do you think it's ok for one individual to own another as property?
KGBFriedChicken02 t1_jefvwnr wrote
Are you actually comparing meat eating to slavery right now? Get a fucking grip
EasyBOven t1_jefwemm wrote
I'm just trying to accurately describe our relationship with certain individuals.
Is our relationship with some non-human animals not one of ownership?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments