•
•

Does Vegetarianism Make a Difference? (reducing-suffering.org)

lnfinity が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Seanay-B -14ポイント-13ポイント  (28子コメント)

I think cows are better off protected by humans due to their practical and financial value until they are humanely and painlessly slaughtered than eaten alive by wolves or something else similarly nasty.

[–]ribnag 10ポイント11ポイント  (13子コメント)

What we call "cows" today don't actually exist as wild (as opposed to feral) animals, and to a degree, never have. They (most likely) descended from aurochs, an extinct type of Eurasian cattle; but what we milk and eat today bears little resemblance to that ancestor.

You can say the same thing for chickens.

So the fact that we treat them more humanely than the wolves would kinda misses the point - They wouldn't exist as such stupid, docile animals in the first place if not for human activity. Would a pack of toy poodles fare well against a wild boar?

[–]Seanay-B -5ポイント-4ポイント  (9子コメント)

That's fine and good, but fact of the matter is, they exist that way now so...what do you want to do, just turn them loose and let them get ravaged? Our two species are in a mutually beneficial relationship now. It benefits us more, to be sure, but they're still better off than they would be if the farms just vanished, for reasons relating to their population alone.

[–]1935X 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

I see this "release them all at once/farming all stops instantly" hypothetical way too often. Nobody expects the world to stop eating meat in a single day. People ideally would slowly stop eating meat, farms would cut back on production gradually and then cows and chickens would be weird relics of a bygone era that some people keep as pets.

Not even the crazy animal rights activists who burn down labs and throw blood at people wearing coats expect abolition instantly.

[–]sydbobyd 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I see this "release them all at once/farming all stops instantly" hypothetical way too often.

It's a lovely false dilemma.

[–]Seanay-B 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It starts with people slowly stopping meat-eating. Not only does that strike me as totally unrealistic, but extremely inconvenient and not at all morally obligatory.

[–]Outofmyelephant 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

Let them die off naturally. And before anyone starts crying too hard, no they wont be extinct, there are farmers in Europe who are selectively breeding their original traits back into the Aurochs, research Heck Cattle.

Our two species are in a mutually beneficial relationship now. It benefits us more, to be sure, but they're still better off than they would be if the farms just vanished, for reasons relating to their population alone.

There is no mutual benefit here, we are gaining all the benefits. If your life was to live till you were 3 years old in a small cage where you had no freedom and were treated like meat, after which you were slaughtered for food, would you consider your life to be a "benefit"? Wouldn't it be a much better fate to just never be born to start with?

[–]Seanay-B 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's a cherry-picked example that doesn't represent the general nature of cow farming. Even among veal farmers there are varying degrees of cow "happiness." To answer your question though, I wouldn't want you deciding for me whether I should've been born in the first place or not, thank you very much.

Cows are safe and sheltered and well-fed until we eat them. If we suddenly stopped farming them, their lives would be short and end painfully, and if we were morally obligated not to farm/eat them, wouldn't a mere gradual decrease in meat consumption still be evil?

[–]Yiia 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

What would realistically happen is people would slowly stop eating meat. The demand would go down, and less cows would be bred. It's not that suddenly millions of cows would be turned loose into the world, it's that those millions of cows just wouldn't be born (to then be slaughtered). Some would probably be kept around just because there will be plenty of people who wouldn't want modern cows to go extinct, even though they would not be able to survive in the wild because they are products of human intervention and development.

[–]Seanay-B 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

People slowing stopping their meat consumption has to come first, rather than resulting from whatever sort of farm shutting-down solution you may come up with. I highly doubt they will, and I don't think they have any obligation to do so. If they can take care of cattle while they're still alive and slaughter them humanely, let them eat.

Further, I think cow preservations are kind of far-fetched. Seems like a massive undertaking and there's not much reason to fund it.

[–]zuzununu 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The cows currently in captivity aren't really the issue, it's not like there's a real chance that factory farms are forced to abruptly shut down.

The issue is the potential cattle which will be born into factory farms living wretched lives vs not existing because demand for factory farms is lower.

I think it's missing a point to see the cows as a species. Is perpetuating a species worth hurting animals? Isn't the only reason people care about perpetuating species ecological biodiversity? I didn't think any of that applied to domesticated animals.

[–]Sho_nuff_ -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

The "docile animals" you reference were bred by humans for their entertainment or food.

Example there was no such thing as a poodle (as you reference) before man started selectively breeding dogs to get that result.

[–]DrunkEllington -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It doesn't miss the point because it applies to hunting wild animals. If you're all about reducing suffering you would favor hunting deer rather than let them die of disease or predation. Hashtag biological ignorance.

[–]Misantupe 18ポイント19ポイント  (9子コメント)

Oh, I didn't realize the animal industry saved cows from the wild and gave them shelter. I always kind of assumed they were bred by the industry. Thanks for correcting my ignorance.

[–]zuzununu -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

posts like this are detrimental to reddit.

I personally don't agree with Seanay-B's position, and the arguments I've seen for it in the past are weak, but this is a discussion based subreddit, and this is a totally trash post responding to an earnest one.

[–]Misantupe 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, it's not an earnest post. It's a simple question, the counterargument to which is easily retrievable. It does not require an earnest answer.

[–]zuzununu 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

His statement led with "I think...". It is uncharitable to think he wasn't being earnest in his opinion and looking for a discussion.

Why even respond if aren't looking to discuss?

[–]DrunkEllington -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Maybe we let them die of disease rather than slaughter them?

[–]Zarathustra420 -3ポイント-2ポイント  (3子コメント)

This. I believe we should be making strides to ensure their comfort, rather than removing them from the food chain. Being eaten is a very real part of cow life.

[–]zuzununu 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't really see how eating a cow helps to fulfil it's meaning, and I think that it is probably against a cow's interests to eat it.

On the other hand, I think that mistreating animals is very much in line with the meaning of farms, the majority of which have profit as their primary motivation.

Suppose that regardless whether or not we tried ensure their comfort, the brutal force of economics and profits led to livestock being mistreated, would this be evidence that we should try to avoid rearing livestock at all?

[–]Zarathustra420 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Regulations can fix that problem. We could make the same argument about capitalism 200 years ago. But we didn't give up on it; we placed limitations on the production that protected against the exploitation of people. We can do the same for cattle, it isn't an all-or-nothing thing.

Instead of spending their lives in a box being fed grains they were never meant to eat, maybe we can let them roam, and feed them grass.

[–]DrunkEllington -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Boo. Let them die of disease.