• NaevaTheRat [she/her]@vegantheoryclub.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can make a purely rational environmental argument with reducing CO2 emissions.

      Please do this without resorting to an emotional motivation such as “People enjoy being alive and not suffering” or whatever.

        • NaevaTheRat [she/her]@vegantheoryclub.orgM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          What do to mean when you say “emotional argument”? I understand it as something like “an argument which rests on an appeal to an emotional experience” or similar.

          For example a mathematical proof is not an emotional argument, as a being without any emotions would be able to verify it as true.

          However “people don’t want to die, so you shouldn’t kill them” is an emotional argument as it fundamentally rests on the counterfactual “a person assumed to have qualia observing a universe in which they had been killed might experience negative valence”. Which only makes sense if the notion of another being you assume to have qualia being sad in a way which is impossible in reality upsets you.

    • leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Of course that’s emotional.

      Reducing suffering is based on the idea that I don’t like suffering, therefore I don’t want others to suffer. That’s emotional.

        • leisesprecher@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Philosophy is based on logic, not straight emotions

          Yeah, sorry, but that’s straight untrue.

          As I wrote before, every time you’re doing a value judgement, you’re arguing based on emotions.

          Saying shredding two animals causes more suffering than shredding no animals is a rational, provable statement. But whether suffering is bad or not, is a value judgement and thus not rational.

          If you say, “I don’t like suffering” to someone with a “no pain, no gain” shirt, your argument is weaker.

          And both of these statements are value judgement, you’re doing a category error here.

    • 🏴 hamid abbasi [he/him] 🏴@vegantheoryclub.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t give a flying fuck about CO2. I care that you are murdering an animal and ending its life for no reason. Animals have rights including the right to live without your torturing them and mudering them. Everything else is out of scope for veganism. It is an ethical position advocating for the rights of animals, not a utilitarian calculation.

      • ambiguous_yelp@vegantheoryclub.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Please don’t call animals it, they are someone not something, changing the language around the oppression has a widespread knock on effect to changing people’s negative opinions towards non human animals

        • 🏴 hamid abbasi [he/him] 🏴@vegantheoryclub.orgM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’ll try but please also be considerate of other users and the fact English isn’t everyone’s native language. English isn’t my first or only language. I will try my best but I will make this mistake often because this is difficult and I am not contributing to animal suffering because my native tongue doesn’t make this distinction at all.

            • 🏴 hamid abbasi [he/him] 🏴@vegantheoryclub.orgM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              My native language that I only spoke until I was about 8 years old doesn’t make any distinction between gender or distinguish between living and non living objects. Everyone and everything is it and its lol.

              You can feel free to police language on Wikipedia or bring awareness to this, and I said I would keep this in mind and try but I don’t really want anyone policing users who may not speak English natively or have learning disabilities.

              • Well @vegantheoryclub.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                That’s fair enough, That’s a cool way of speaking. As I always love hearing about how languages are unique.

                On another point Spanish and french have gendered words that are to keep track of lol.

                  • Well @vegantheoryclub.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    You can learn it if you keep practising learning the words and sentence structures like through apps like Duolingo or handbook guides like lonely planet or by speaking with others.

                    I’m planning to learn b2 french that I will use to help with my Spanish (one wall I ran into is that I didn’t know enough words to describe certain things) when I get back to it lol.