Is vegan ethics based on the idea that man is equal or superior to animals?

[Chakra]

Hating plants equals hating:

1. Houses and assorted things we put in them like chairs, tables, and beds
2. Clothing, such as shirts, pants, underwear, and shoes
3. Fossil Fuels and all of their assorted benefits like electricity and technology like computers
4. Foods, such as all grains and grain products, plus all fruits and vegetables
5. Beverages, such as all types of alcoholic beverages, sodas, tea, and coffee
6. Being alive in general, because you stupid animals basically don't exist without the plant kingdom.

(in seriousness though, our 100% total dependence on plants is why I get super confused why people think not eating animals is some sort of moral high ground)

I think it's because animals feel pain and suffer to a greater degree than plants. Even then, you should know that the average meat-eater kills more trees and plants (animal agriculture is one of the leading causes of Amazonian deforestation and also we use about 50% of our crops in America to feed farm animals) than the average vegan.

 

[MountainPine]

Having dominion over the animals means we were given the responsibility of caring for the animals, not to do with them as we please.

Christians who say that the Bible tells them it is okay to eat meat are either lying or haven't read all of it. This ebook doesn't leave any room for doubt that the Bible promotes a vegan diet and lifestyle.

 

[Nous]

Christians who say that the Bible tells them it is okay to eat meat are either lying or haven't read all of it. This ebook doesn't leave any room for doubt that the Bible promotes a vegan diet and lifestyle.

Thank you for this. I read a little of it so far. I was trying to find what was the authors' assessment of animal sacrifice in the Bible. But there are 650 uses of the word "sacrifice" in the ebook. I didn't get very far on that.

But I did note this:

Similarly, our closest simian relatives are vegans, though we have actually seen people argue that gorillas are omnivores because less than 1% of their diet consists of insects they eat while grooming each other. The inference to be drawn from this, we are told, is that humans are natural meat-eaters, which really does nothing if not demonstrate the paucity of good arguments for them to draw on.​

Yes, one can find the ridiculous claim that gorillas are omnivores on this board.

 

[Nous]

I think it's because animals feel pain and suffer to a greater degree than plants. Even then, you should know that the average meat-eater kills more trees and plants (animal agriculture is one of the leading causes of Amazonian deforestation and also we use about 50% of our crops in America to feed farm animals) than the average vegan.

Chakra, you always hit the nail on the head.

 

[Silverscale derg]

"How can you eat meat? Animals are no different than any of us, we're animals"
"But animals eat animals"
"Well... Yea, but we're humans, we're supposed to be better"

See the problem with this? If humans are equal to animals, then we're under the same ethical responsibility that animals are under... which is basically no ethical responsibility between species. In other words, if animals are equal, then we have no moral obligation to treat them like us because animals don't.
The only way this makes sense is to assume that man is superior to animals and has a moral obligation to never harm them, simply because man is the most evolved and with great evolution comes great responsibility.

Neither, I as a dragon eat animals, one warm blooded creature plus quite a bit of fish as well as insects. I want equality, humans are no better than animals, in fact I personally think they're a bit worse. No other animal hunts to be able to drag the head of the dead animal around saying it's a trophy. Life has a cycle. Predators have prey. Predators don't always kill prey either, prey sometimes kills the predators. Humans kill so much so I understand the view of it but the animals on the farms you want to "save" will only be wasted if you don't eat them. I am of the mindset that you kill what you eat. It's noble to end a life as a meal instead of having your life wasted

 

[Milton Platt]

"How can you eat meat? Animals are no different than any of us, we're animals"
"But animals eat animals"
"Well... Yea, but we're humans, we're supposed to be better"

See the problem with this? If humans are equal to animals, then we're under the same ethical responsibility that animals are under... which is basically no ethical responsibility between species. In other words, if animals are equal, then we have no moral obligation to treat them like us because animals don't.
The only way this makes sense is to assume that man is superior to animals and has a moral obligation to never harm them, simply because man is the most evolved and with great evolution comes great responsibility.

Also, it is selective. I've seen a vegan smash a spider. Doesn't it also have this supposed right? What about the earthworms killed by tilling to plant the vegan's veggies? What about all the wildlife displaced by mega farming? I have no issue with people being vegetarians or vegans. Done properly it is healthy. But stop the morality B.S.

 

[Milton Platt]

Because people eat "meat".
When we stop the animals will stop.

Baloney.

 

[Valjean]

psychedelicsoul said: ↑
"How can you eat meat? Animals are no different than any of us, we're animals"
"But animals eat animals"
"Well... Yea, but we're humans, we're supposed to be better"

See the problem with this? If humans are equal to animals, then we're under the same ethical responsibility that animals are under... which is basically no ethical responsibility between species. In other words, if animals are equal, then we have no moral obligation to treat them like us because animals don't.
The only way this makes sense is to assume that man is superior to animals and has a moral obligation to never harm them, simply because man is the most evolved and with great evolution comes great responsibility.

Man is a moral agent. Animals are not.
Animals have no behavioral options.
They are not aware of the effects their actions have on other animals.

Also, it is selective. I've seen a vegan smash a spider. Doesn't it also have this supposed right? What about the earthworms killed by tilling to plant the vegan's veggies? What about all the wildlife displaced by mega farming? I have no issue with people being vegetarians or vegans. Done properly it is healthy. But stop the morality B.S.

Does a spider or earthworm have self interest? Does it even anticipate futurity?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

"How can you eat meat? Animals are no different than any of us, we're animals"
"But animals eat animals"
"Well... Yea, but we're humans, we're supposed to be better"

See the problem with this? If humans are equal to animals, then we're under the same ethical responsibility that animals are under... which is basically no ethical responsibility between species. In other words, if animals are equal, then we have no moral obligation to treat them like us because animals don't.
The only way this makes sense is to assume that man is superior to animals and has a moral obligation to never harm them, simply because man is the most evolved and with great evolution comes great responsibility.

I think it boils down to being able to come to the realization that your culinary choices needn't cause harm, or "as much" harm. It really is that simple. We humans are capable of understanding this, assimilating it, and acting on it. If someone wants to view animals as "on par" with humans as they go about trying not to harm other sentient life on the planet what's wrong with that?

 

[Milton Platt]

Man is a moral agent. Animals are not. How do you know?
Animals have no behavioral options. How do you know?

They are not aware of the effects their actions have on other animals. How do you know?

Does a spider or earthworm have self interest? Does it even anticipate futurity?
I don't know.
Does a shrimp or clam have self interest? I eat them. Does a snail have self interest? I have eaten them as well. What is self interest, anyway? How do you positively identify it in a given organism?
So the vegan morality play is not about not eating animals, it is about not eating animals that have "self interest"?

 

[Twilight Hue]

farms offer a swift end, hunting does somewhat, but nature alone? certainly not

any clean hunting kill is obviously a merciful end compared with aging, starving, and predators

But I don't find pleasure in that, any more than I would having a pet put down, even if it's the right thing to do- if you take my point on the distinction here

For the most part I would say we're a pretty humane predator. We kill animals swiftly and quickly for the greater part thanks in part to our developed sense of empathy.

 

[SalixIncendium]

"How can you eat meat? Animals are no different than any of us, we're animals"
"But animals eat animals"
"Well... Yea, but we're humans, we're supposed to be better"

See the problem with this? If humans are equal to animals, then we're under the same ethical responsibility that animals are under... which is basically no ethical responsibility between species. In other words, if animals are equal, then we have no moral obligation to treat them like us because animals don't.
The only way this makes sense is to assume that man is superior to animals and has a moral obligation to never harm them, simply because man is the most evolved and with great evolution comes great responsibility.

While I'm vegetarian, not vegan, which is to say, that I don't eat flesh, but I do eat animal products, such as dairy and eggs.

My vegetarianism isn't based on humans somehow being better or superior, as is posited the OP. This time around, my diet is not exclusively based on principle, but more for health reasons, but the first time I put myself on a vegetarian diet, it was purely on principle in protest of inhumane animal treatment and slaughter. After speaking with many vegans and vegetarians, the majority with which I've interacted are on this diet for the same reason.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

For the most part I would say we're a pretty humane predator. We kill animals swiftly and quickly for the greater part thanks in part to our developed sense of empathy.

When actually "preying" on animals - as in hunting, sure. But what we perpetrate within our large-scale ("factory") farms is anything but humane. Sure, the death may be relatively swift in many cases (they do, at least, try), but the living conditions are deplorable all the way around. Especially in the dairy and egg industries, where killing the animal isn't the primary course of action - and the conditions are only as good as they need to be... ever.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Man is a moral agent. Animals are not.
Animals have no behavioral options.
They are not aware of the effects their actions have on other animals.

Are there any studies that prove these positions beyond a doubt? Or is this your personal opinion?

 

[Nous]

I as a dragon eat animals, one warm blooded creature plus quite a bit of fish as well as insects. I want equality, humans are no better than animals

It sounds like you are trying to justify your own killing and eating of animals on the grounds that other animals eat other animals. But not all other animals eat other animals. Comparing yourself with these animals, your attempted justification fails. In fact, you are not a dragon but a human, whose closest living relatives, who are also hominids, eat a diet that consists of, at most, only a tiny percentage of animal matter, mostly insects that they catch. I have no problem with humans eating insects. I especially encourage you to eat mosquitoes and roaches.

 

[Nous]

Also, it is selective. I've seen a vegan smash a spider. Doesn't it also have this supposed right? What about the earthworms killed by tilling to plant the vegan's veggies? What about all the wildlife displaced by mega farming? I have no issue with people being vegetarians or vegans. Done properly it is healthy. But stop the morality B.S.

The B.S. here is yours. Accidentally killing an earthworm in the effort to grow vegetables is nothing like intentionally and knowingly causing intelligent, sensitive, sentient animals such as cows, pig, goats, birds lifelong suffering in factory farms. Get real. Get moral.

 

[Milton Platt]

The B.S. here is yours. Accidentally killing an earthworm in the effort to grow vegetables is nothing like intentionally and knowingly causing intelligent, sensitive, sentient animals such as cows, pig, goats, birds lifelong suffering in factory farms. Get real. Get moral.

Morals are established by societies, groups, etc. That's why they differ around the globe. I don't think it is wrong to question someone who says it morally wrong to kill animals, and then is selective about which animals it applies to.

 

[Valjean]

Valjean said: ↑
Man is a moral agent. Animals are not. How do you know?
Animals have no behavioral options. How do you know?

They are not aware of the effects their actions have on other animals. How do you know?

Psychological testing in other animals has failed to demonstrate the degree of social awareness necessary for moral agency. Animals don't appear to possess the requisite degree of Theory of Mind.

Does a spider or earthworm have self interest? Does it even anticipate futurity?
I don't know.
Does a shrimp or clam have self interest? I eat them. Does a snail have self interest? I have eaten them as well.

Is snail sentient? Is it self aware? Does it care whether it continues to exist -- keeping in mind that this presupposes an anticipation of futurity?
These capacities are rooted in a degree of neurological complexity a snail is unlikely to possess.
Nevertheless, speaking only for myself, I eschew eating them based on a likely capacity to suffer or perceive pain, and evasive behavior that could be evidence of self-interest.

What is self interest, anyway? How do you positively identify it in a given organism?
So the vegan morality play is not about not eating animals, it is about not eating animals that have "self interest"?

There are many theories of morality. There is no, single "vegan morality" -- animal rights theories are complicated.
People extend moral consideration to other people based on a spectrum of features not unique to humans. Moral consistency would require extending moral consideration to all organisms exhibiting these features, regardless of species.

For the most part I would say we're a pretty humane predator. We kill animals swiftly and quickly for the greater part thanks in part to our developed sense of empathy.

That's not usually true in a western economy. Animals are commodified. Their value is entirely proprietary. Their interests and rights are ignored. A pig or chicken's life in a factory farm is one of unending misery followed by an often cruel death.
Other than the ability to do so, what gives humans the right to exploit other sentient species?

 

[Milton Platt]

Psychological testing in other animals has failed to demonstrate the degree of social awareness necessary for moral agency. Animals don't appear to possess the requisite degree of Theory of Mind.
Is snail sentient? Is it self aware? Does it care whether it continues to exist -- keeping in mind that this presupposes an anticipation of futurity?
These capacities are rooted in a degree of neurological complexity a snail is unlikely to possess.
Nevertheless, speaking only for myself, I eschew eating them based on a likely capacity to suffer or perceive pain, and evasive behavior that could be evidence of self-interest.
There are many theories of morality. There is no, single "vegan morality" -- animal rights theories are complicated.
People extend moral consideration to other people based on a spectrum of features not unique to humans. Moral consistency would require extending moral consideration to all organisms exhibiting these features, regardless of species.
That's not usually true in a western economy. Animals are commodified. Their value is entirely proprietary. Their interests and rights are ignored. A pig or chicken's life in a factory farm is one of unending misery followed by an often cruel death.
Other than the ability to do so, what gives humans the right to exploit other sentient species?

I would say a snail is aware of and reacts to it's surroundings. So you could say it sentient I guess. Same for for earthworms, shrimp, clams, etc. Does that matter in the context here? I thought most vegans thought it was not moral to eat ANY animals, or to kill them. Yes, you are right, not all vegans/vegetarians march under the same banner.. I am not trying to lump all vegans under one moral code. My posts are a reaction to many that have played the "It is immoral to kill animals" card. I am not addressing farm animals at all.

Some animals do indeed display the equivalent of morals, most notably many of the apes and some monkeys. But that is an aside.

 

[Milton Platt]

The B.S. here is yours. Accidentally killing an earthworm in the effort to grow vegetables is nothing like intentionally and knowingly causing intelligent, sensitive, sentient animals such as cows, pig, goats, birds lifelong suffering in factory farms. Get real. Get moral.

sen·tient
ˈsen(t)SH(ē)ənt/
adjective

1. able to perceive or feel things.
   
   synonyms: (capable of) feeling, living, live;

Worms react to light, to temperature, to moisture, to touch. Is that not being sentient? No matter....I'm not a fan of factory farms, either. I was only addressing a fraction of the vegan/vegetarian population that claims it is immoral to kill animals and then excludes the ones that it is inconvenient to avoid. If they said only that it was immoral to eat animals, they might be able to prove their point.