Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsunami
I do understand you, I suppose we're just having different timescales.
|
Well, the further you go back in time, the further away you get biologically speaking from modern man and the less sense it makes.
I feel I should point out that I'm not against vegetarianism. I'm against erronous claims. I think a vegetarian has to base a decision to be a vegetarian on something which is not false. I can see why one could wish to believe that humans are herbivores who just recently in modern times picked up meat, but that severly diminishes the extreme importance eating meat has had on human evolution and development. Vegetarians should acknowledge that and find something else to base their diet choice on, such as thinking meat tastes bad, because of vegetarianism being more sustainable or a refusal to support a meat industry which they have something against personally.
When it comes to animal suffering, I don't really believe we have a moral obligation to animals not to cause them to suffer any more than a lion or a shark does towards their prey. I don't believe in a God or universe that judges our actions. Any moral obligation we have in regards to animal suffering is to ourselves and eachother. We're morally judged by ourselves and the people we live with. We have a capacity to empathize with animals and when their suffering makes us or others feel bad, we may be doing something morally wrong. The way we treat animals can be a reflection on ourselves and someone finding enjoyment in torturing a cat probably has a lot of issues and you may want to stay away from that person for good reason. But when I'm out fishing a dinner and catch something, I don't feel a moral obligation towards the fish or anything else that tells me it's wrong to kill it and eat it. I would feel obliged to reduce it's suffering because causing suffering makes me feel bad. If someone cried and begged me not to kill the fish, I would also feel a moral obligation towards that person.