• commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Can you supply a convincing argument for suffering?

    i’m not saying it’s a moral good. i’m saying it’s amoral. as in it is neither good or bad in itself.

    • naught@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      We have agency over our actions and the ability to reduce the negative impacts we have on the world. We are unique in this ability, and we should exercise it

        • naught@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Would you kick a dog in the street? Shoot a cat with a bb gun? These are things that happen with frequency, but I wouldn’t do because I think that causing pain to another animal, senselessly, is a bad thing.

          Would you raise a chicken in complete darkness for its whole life? Would you raise a cow in a suffocatingly small pen among its excrement? Impregnate a cow constantly and steal its babies away for meat so you can continue to milk it until it dies? Animals feel pain. They communicate, they suffer, they mourn.

          If you can supply an argument that causing suffering of innocent animals is good/doesn’t matter, I’m all ears.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you can supply an argument that causing suffering … is good/doesn’t matter

            sure. battlefield amputations cause suffering. sometimes it saves a life. it’s good.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you can supply an argument that causing suffering of innocent animals is good/doesn’t matter, I’m all ears.

            “innocent” here is an appeal to emotion, since we don’t regard non-human animals as moral agents.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Would you kick a dog in the street? Shoot a cat with a bb gun?

            no. these are cruel. practicing cruelty toward animals may create a habit, and end with practicing cruelty toward people, which would be immoral. it is best not to practice cruelty at all.

            • naught@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Animal agriculture is necessarily cruel. It is efficient. By your logic, this cruelty is negative. It sounds like we are very close to agreeing, frankly

                  • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    cruelty would be inflicting pain for its own sake. in so-called factory farming, the pain is still only incidental. that is, if it were possible to create the same outputs with no additional inputs, and that process had no pain, there is no reason why a factory farming operation would prefer the painful process. so it is not cruel, it is only indifferent.