Debunking Carnism

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else below.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: Debunking Carnism

#281  Postby ScholasticSpastic » Aug 02, 2016 4:32 pm

romansh wrote:Rules and regulations?

If I don't follow the rules and regulations, and if I get caught I will bear the consequences. See no need to hang on to the baggage of morality.

No, I don't think rules and regulations necessarily applies as a reasonable term. There is law and there are ethics, and the two don't overlap as much as many assume- in fact good law impinges upon ethical determination as little as possible. There you go. I just made a moral statement about law.

It is possible to define "morality" in terms of rules of conduct- which is something you are trying to split out on its own. You are trying to use special definitions for things rather than using accepted definitions for things. This is why I hold to my suspicion of unexamined baggage.
"You have to be a real asshole to quote yourself."
~ ScholasticSpastic
User avatar
ScholasticSpastic
 
Name: D-Money Sr.
Posts: 6354
Age: 45
Male

Country: Behind Zion's Curtain
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Debunking Carnism

#282  Postby tuco » Aug 02, 2016 4:45 pm

VazScep wrote:I'm a vegan but I volunteer as a cat torturer on Saturdays to balance it out.


While I tend to agree that balance is of importance you might want to look at bigger picture. Can leave the cats alone as someone else will balance it, for you.
tuco
 
Posts: 15550

Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#283  Postby laklak » Aug 02, 2016 6:36 pm

That's pretty much my take on things, and it's why I drive a big pick up truck. Somebody else will ride a bicycle while I ride in air conditioned comfort, listening to a nice stereo system. What, me worry?
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 67
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#284  Postby tuco » Aug 02, 2016 6:38 pm

You pay taxes or at least ought to ;)
tuco
 
Posts: 15550

Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#285  Postby laklak » Aug 02, 2016 6:42 pm

I do pay taxes. It's a privilege to pay taxes in This Great Country!

OK, I haven't paid any for probably 16 out of the last 20 years, but it was all legal and aboveboard, I swear.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 67
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#286  Postby tuco » Aug 02, 2016 6:46 pm

At least you paid sale tax on your luxuries and did not torture any cats.
tuco
 
Posts: 15550

Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#287  Postby laklak » Aug 02, 2016 7:23 pm

True. I'd never torture a cat, fuckers have claws.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 67
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Debunking Carnism

#288  Postby romansh » Aug 03, 2016 1:59 am

ScholasticSpastic wrote:
romansh wrote:Rules and regulations?

If I don't follow the rules and regulations, and if I get caught I will bear the consequences. See no need to hang on to the baggage of morality.

No, I don't think rules and regulations necessarily applies as a reasonable term. There is law and there are ethics, and the two don't overlap as much as many assume- in fact good law impinges upon ethical determination as little as possible. There you go. I just made a moral statement about law.

It is possible to define "morality" in terms of rules of conduct- which is something you are trying to split out on its own. You are trying to use special definitions for things rather than using accepted definitions for things. This is why I hold to my suspicion of unexamined baggage.

I don't want to derail this tread.
so I will answer on the free will thread.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2781

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#289  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » Aug 03, 2016 12:01 pm

I veganised a recipe for chipotle chicken chowder. It's tasty but it would still be so much better with meat.
what a terrible image
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: speaking moistly
Posts: 13519
Age: 32
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#290  Postby ScholasticSpastic » Aug 03, 2016 12:13 pm

romansh wrote:
I don't want to derail this tread.
so I will answer on the free will thread.

Not sure how a discussion of what morality/ethics is can derail a thread which purports to prescribe a behavior on ethical grounds. One of the questions which should rightly be dealt with in this thread is why veganism should be considered more ethical, or why "carnism" should be considered less ethical. And while we're trying to determine degrees of fitness in a category, it serves to be clear about what that category is, what its rules are, and how the category space is laid out. What is category "ethics?" As long as we're dealing with the question as related to the topic, it's topical.

Also, while the question of "free will" certainly has interesting ramifications for ethics, I don't see why every discussion of ethics ought to be roped into the topic of free will. It feels like a categorical inversion to me. Ethics is bigger than free will.
"You have to be a real asshole to quote yourself."
~ ScholasticSpastic
User avatar
ScholasticSpastic
 
Name: D-Money Sr.
Posts: 6354
Age: 45
Male

Country: Behind Zion's Curtain
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#291  Postby VazScep » Aug 03, 2016 2:13 pm

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:I veganised a recipe for chipotle chicken chowder. It's tasty but it would still be so much better with meat.
My flatmate cooked a vegan "shepherd's pie" with lentils recently. It was, surprisingly, really good.
Here we go again. First, we discover recursion.
VazScep
 
Posts: 4590

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#292  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » Aug 03, 2016 2:27 pm

Shepherd's pie lends itself really well to vegan substitutions.

This chowder is basically a chilli as a result of using chickpeas instead of chicken. The veg stock and coconut milk didn't significantly change it but the chickpeas did. Uhg.
what a terrible image
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: speaking moistly
Posts: 13519
Age: 32
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#293  Postby romansh » Aug 03, 2016 3:20 pm

A bit of ham in pea soup and bit ham stock for beet and cabbage borscht really lend themselves to being flavourful.

And what would chicken soup be without chicken?
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2781

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#294  Postby Alan B » Aug 03, 2016 5:09 pm

romansh wrote:And what would chicken soup be without chicken?


I'm trying to think of some witty repartee for that one...
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#295  Postby The_Metatron » Aug 04, 2016 4:50 am

Alan B wrote:
romansh wrote:And what would chicken soup be without chicken?

I'm trying to think of some witty repartee for that one...

Soup.


Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 21077
Age: 58
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Debunking Carnism

#296  Postby zoon » Aug 04, 2016 8:29 pm

ScholasticSpastic wrote: There is law and there are ethics, and the two don't overlap as much as many assume- in fact good law impinges upon ethical determination as little as possible.

I didn't follow what you were saying there?
User avatar
zoon
 
Posts: 3230

Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#297  Postby ScholasticSpastic » Aug 04, 2016 8:52 pm

zoon wrote:
I didn't follow what you were saying there?

Laws =/= ethics is mostly what I was saying. They are only partially overlapping categories, and in my opinion it's probably best if we minimize the extent to which they overlap. This is because I recognize that ethical determination is an essential human right, and laws which prescribe ethical conclusions or ethical systems overmuch are at risk of trampling on essential human rights. That said, I must acknowledge that laws follow from ethical principles and thus that they cannot be entirely disentangled from ethics or from consideration on ethical grounds.
"You have to be a real asshole to quote yourself."
~ ScholasticSpastic
User avatar
ScholasticSpastic
 
Name: D-Money Sr.
Posts: 6354
Age: 45
Male

Country: Behind Zion's Curtain
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#298  Postby scott1328 » Aug 05, 2016 12:17 am

Actually, one could say that there is an ethic to good, effective lawmaking. One that is only occasionally heeded
User avatar
scott1328
 
Name: Some call me... Tim
Posts: 8703
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#299  Postby Cnidarian_King » Aug 05, 2016 2:29 am

Ethics and Law are involved with principles and rules respectively, and they are both concerned with how we conduct ourselves, as you have pointed out ScholasticSpastic. You also mentioned that we do not include animals in our social constructions because we cannot have a reciprocal relationship with animals in the way that we have with respective members of our own species. I do agree that most relationships we have with nonhuman animals is zero sum and that we could never fully have an exchange relationship of tolerance. However, we should continue to prevent an avoidable harm whenever possible even if it is not mutual. I don't think that meat eating is unethical comparably to veganism though.

With meat eating, it seems like our ethical intuitions stop working easily because we acknowledge we are ending another creature’s autonomy for our own benefit (that is the strongest argument that equALLity and AlexanderVegan have given). I'm glad that both of you did not resort to the purity/disgust argument of veganism that meat eaters are unclean or our food is not pure. :thumbup:
You both have not, however, looked at the big picture to see how an ethical consideration of each organism relates to the population as a whole and how it affects the ecology. Both laklak and ScholasticSpastic have given examples on how all organisms can pose problems for an ecosystem and cohabiting species. I'm wondering what you are actually thinking in terms of laws, regulations, or large scale plans to replace the diet of our world's population, not just your philosophical objections to meat eating.

One mistake you made Alexander was assume that this “Carnism” claim actually applies to all meat eaters. That it’s considered “Necessary, Natural, Nice and Normal” to eat meat is by no means applicable to all meat eaters; that sounds more like the Biblical types who would assume God placed animals here for our use. Most of us here are a bit uneasy with eating meat, not only because it may have been mistreated but because it did involve a death. Sliming your opponents with the term “Carnism” does nothing. Secondly, you are complaining to meat eaters who are consumers, not producers. I'm wondering what you are actually thinking in terms of laws, regulations, or large scale plans to replace the diet of our world's population, not just your philosophical objections to meat eating.

Production is the part that can be improved upon. Surprisingly, both Democrats and Republicans in the United States have consistently voted for increasing regulations for factory farms but still nearly 90% of Americans eat meat. The 1920’s Food Revolution has stayed with us in the U.S. ever since. Once cultured meat comes onto the market (if it does) and is widely available, we will have an opportunity to reduce our carbon emissions and reduce the factory farming issue.
"Living with uncertainty is hard for many people, and is one of the reasons why people prefer religious truths that are presented as absolute." -Jerry A. Coyne, Faith vs. Fact
"An egg is an impossible enclosure for Deity."- M.B.E.
User avatar
Cnidarian_King
 
Posts: 23
Age: 27
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Debunking Carnism

#300  Postby Alan B » Aug 05, 2016 9:04 am

Excellent, er, double post. (We've all done it!) :shifty: :whistle:

I think the Vegans, in their 'self-righteous' approach are blinded to seeing the bigger picture that while Veganism is O.K. for the 'First World' them, there is the rest of the world to consider.
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to General Debunking

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest