[inri]

Quote by: Elminister This is a nice subjective observation you have made here. Thank you. Duely noted.

It's only subjective "IF" you disagree that causing animal suffering is unkind, and IF you disagree that kindness is valued over cruelty.

Yes, quite right that the numbers would gradualy decrease over time. That's why I included that as a stipulation in my question that you seem to want to skirt around.You only repeated what I already said. Why? This gradual decrease does not exclude the scenario of these final lots of domesticated commodity aniamls needing some sort of action or idea of what to do with them. Using assessments you have made about the increasing prevalence of veganism and applying the only real absolute statement you seem to want to stick to that being the killing of sentient things being wrong; this would be a probable scenario to use to express your argument.

There are so many issues to be factored in regarding such a scenario...lets see.. IF the entire worlds population came upon a day where it was realized that EVERY SINGLE PERSON was now an ethical vegan, we'd be dealing with a near entire population of humans who had reached a level of emotional/psychological development which embraced a philosphy of 'do the least amount of harm possible'.. This would indeed be a very, very different world from the one we presently experience, therefore this question and those like it must be answered while attempting to imagine such a world dynamic.

I can only imagine that at this stage of the game, any remaining lots of such animals would be extremely minimal. A world majority of those who value kindness above all else, (as would be necessary for veganism to be the accepted diet amongst all) would very likely embrace the idea of adopting out these animals for care by interested individuals. Further breeding of these remaining animals would be curtailed while they lived out their remaining life spans.

Who said anything about hunting being "solely" resposible for keeping wild life numbers in check? I can provide as facts, though, the direct influence apon these numbers buy hunters.Wherein your posistion would erradicate this impact made by men. I asked you how you would supplement this influence. Again, you seem to want to navigate around this question. No new topic is needed as this point is being at the other end of the spectrum in regards to hunting animals to fufill this deep rooted urge I support is, well,obviously vegetarianism.

When this world reaches a point where every human has attained the level of development necessary to consider all animals worthy of consideration and protection from uncessary cruelty, It's pretty likely that these deep rooted urges to 'kill' and 'consume flesh' will no longer be part of man's psyche. This is clearly a ways off....although 'some' humans are presently exhibiting these advanced tendencies.

For your argument to see full fruition in regards to your key point,- that being the "killing another sentient being is wrong" due to me boiling your argument down to this very point several times- how could it be if everybody was not indeed a vegetarian?

Will everyone one day agree with veganism? I surely do not know for sure, However, It does appear that more and more humans are aspiring to higher levels of ethics, including animal consideration amongst their personal and group values.

and its implied actions coming to fruition not necessitate eveybody becoming a vegetarian? I'm flabbergasted that you can not or choose not to see how your posistion demands an all vegan society as its end scenario?

My position includes a statement of fact: Ethical vegans are morally superior to those who are not...IF...one holds values that say kindness is more desireble than cruelty...and if one believes that purposefully inflicting suffering upon another sentient being is a cruel act.

How can I state that everybody SHOULD become a vegan when I don't actually believe that all humans currently possess the mental/emotional development necessary for the mind set necessary?

Sure, perhaps one day the tipping point will be reached and veganism will be legislated....perhaps this could happen..? who knows. currently, we're light years away from even the possibility that an entire world's population would reach this level of moral dvelopment.

Depsite whatever posistion you think you will have by denying it, yes, yes you are saying that everyone should become a vegan because killing other sentient beings is wrong.

It would be nice if everyone would become ethically predisposed to veganism...yet I don't believe that everyone currently 'can'....a bit of a conundrum.



My argument really is more simple...once again:

Those who extend their empathy/compassion and integral action to encompass all sentient beings are of a higher moral/mental/emotional development than those who do not.

The above statement is a fact IF kindness is valued over cruelty and IF it's accepted that animals are capable of suffering in a similar manner to humans.

Clearly, if you do not agree with the above 'If's" you will not agree with my position.

Seems to me you don't know enough about the intermingling of man and animal to make such an assertion.

I was alluding to the fact that many humans do not feel the necessity to eat meat. You seem believe that underneath the surface, ALL humans have these animalistic urges you speak of. Fact is, many humans have absolutely no urge to kill....no urge to consume animal flesh...and there are even those who do, yet overcome them due to advanced empathy and integrity.

Even in a scenario devoid of these qualites you describe here you still assert that killing is still wrong so why bother with quibbling over inconsequentials. I already said i don't promote cruelty to animals.

You do not consider killing a sentient being with a will to live to be at all cruel? do you believe it to be an act of 'kindness'?

In would say the individual who rapes another is less compassionate,yes. Your not saying everybody has the compulsive urge to rape are you?

I'm not saying everybodyd has the compulsive urge to rape...but 'some' do...You're not saying ALL humans have a compulsive urge to kill animals and eat their flesh, are you?

Causing a person to XX amount of years of moral/physical anguish is far more heinous an act than terminating a cows life and subsequently ending the cruelty* then and there, I would say.

Sure, when we compare levels of cruelty, our own personal values will come into play...and most of us will likely agree that certain cruelties trump others. However, for those who believe in a philosophy of 'do the least amount of harm possible' in all scenarios, ANY amount of suffering/abuse is problematic and must be considered.