a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment
organicAnt  ·  3479 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Critically analysing the moral consistency of our beliefs

    After our last discussion, I reduced the amount of meat that I consume.
I'm really really happy to hear that. Every meal counts so thank you on behalf of those that didn't have to die for you.

    We cannot simply repeat slogans like "We must respect life!" We must ask difficult theoretical questions like "What is life?"
We're going of track and it feels like we're forgetting the point of the original post. To re-iterate, this thread is about exploring selective discrimination. This means taking into consideration the point of view of the victims we kill. If you did that and if you put yourself in the hoofs of an animal who's in the slaughter line, "We must respect life!" would not be a slogan for you. It sounds like a slogan to you because you're distanced from the victims.

    Are some forms of life more deserving of respect than others?"
I already answered this thoroughly before but here's a second or third attempt. For as long as you see nature structured in a pyramid of value you'll always discriminate against those "below" you. And I'm not just referring to animal rights. Not that long ago, in that same human made pyramid of value you're insisting on referring to there were slave owners, racists, sexists, Nazis, and every other type of discrimination of Humanity.

    If whales think this, then whales also have the correct anthropocentric view that the human species is the most powerful and important species on the planet. Human behaviour can determine if whales go extinct, the reverse is not true.
The whale example was to illustrate how we can't trust our own evaluation of greatness because we're obviously biased. But for the sake of a mental exercise let's entertain for a minute, that Humans are in fact the greatest, most powerful species on top of the the Universal pyramid of everything. Does that give us the right of subjugating everything "under" us? Or should we use our power responsibly to look after everything and everyone "under" us? The first way of thinking is how humans have been behaving so far and look at the world we've created.

    Plenty of animals are violently killed by other animals (even when not necessary for survival), Can you give me any examples? I'm particularly interested in examples of this happening in the billions of victims.

but you recognize that only humans are capable of making thoughtful, ethical choices.| Weather we choose to respecting all life or subjugate and kill everything for personal pleasure, how we treat those weaker than us is the greatest measurement of our character.