Vegtarian posses a dilemma for fellow vegetarians

[rantal]

I am curious to know if you read the question?

all the best, rantal

[John K]

I guess the real question is would the vegetarian act like Socrates; would he forfeit life in order to embrace the philosophy?

I had considered that but by introducing the need to stay alive to help others made the question examine the reasons for the person being a vegetarian.

Those vegetarian for ethical reasons should, I maintain, opt to eat the still born baby those who are vegetarian for other reasons may choose to kill and animal

all the best, rantal

Utilitarianism?

[rantal]

I guess the real question is would the vegetarian act like Socrates; would he forfeit life in order to embrace the philosophy?

I had considered that but by introducing the need to stay alive to help others made the question examine the reasons for the person being a vegetarian.

Those vegetarian for ethical reasons should, I maintain, opt to eat the still born baby those who are vegetarian for other reasons may choose to kill and animal

all the best, rantal

Utilitarianism?

No, not really more a deontological vs squemishness!

all the best, rantal

[Rortabend]

I don't see the dilemma. Nothing about vegetarianism forces you to eat the baby. The fact that vegetarians value other animal life higher than meat-eaters does not mean that they value animal life simpliciter. Questions of respect for human life, societal norms, revulsion, self-loathing would clearly force most veggies to eat the animal. This doesn't mean they aren't good vegetarians or are somehow being inconsistent. If I was starving, the fact that I choose to eat an animal rather than my own leg also doesn't show any inconsistency in my vegetarianism.

[rantal]

I don't see the dilemma. Nothing about vegetarianism forces you to eat the baby. The fact that vegetarians value other animal life higher than meat-eaters does not mean that they value animal life simpliciter. Questions of respect for human life, societal norms, revulsion, self-loathing would clearly force most veggies to eat the animal. This doesn't mean they aren't good vegetarians or are somehow being inconsistent. If I was starving, the fact that I choose to eat an animal rather than my own leg also doesn't show any inconsistency in my vegetarianism.

Well, each must make their choice according to their conscience but, personally I would rather eat the baby than take a life and that is based on valuing the life of the animal over the dead body of the child

all the best, rantal.

[Kayla]

surely this depends on the wild animal

have you ever eaten fresh canadian moose

moose steak with those little red potatoes roasted with garlic and lightly seasoned with black pepper and oregano will be better than a dead baby every time

[rantal]

I am sure you are right about the taste, though a cannibal informs me that the tastiest thing to eat is the upper arm of a young woman. This however is not a matter of taste

all the best, rantal

[Kayla]

the canadians charge huge fees for moose licensing - and limit the number the issue

so that the hunting does not decrease the moose population

the meat from the moose has zero ecological cost

unlike say tofu which comes with a considerable ecological cost - yes, i know it is still a lot less than feedlot finished beef

and the ecological cost translates into animal deaths

so from vegetarian point of view i am not sure what the objection to moose is

[rantal]

You presume I eat tofu? If so, you are wrong.

My reason for choosing to eat the dead baby rather than kill an animal is simple to understand, I value the life of the animal above that of breaking the social taboo of eating a dead baby

all the best, rantal

[Arising_uk]

Like you, I two would eat the baby, by revulsion of eating a human is overcome by disinclination to take a life

Where's the problem? As you didn't say that you killed the animal in the same way you were not responsible for the stillborn baby so no need to overcome the revulsion, just eat the dead animal. Or are you saying you'd rather eat the baby than kill the animal and eat it? If so I think the revulsion could cause you to reassess your ethics in its light. If not I'm confused either way as how is it you could overcome this revulsion and not the one associated with killing an eating an animal? Or is it that you wish to stay true to your ethics? If so then eat the baby, heard it tastes like pork but best not tell your rescuers you had such a choice.

Personally I'd have my cake and eat it, so I'd bury the baby and go find the veg or fruit that must exist upon this island as if its a freshly killed animal then its either a carnivore or a herbivore and either way it means theres veg or fruit somewhere about. Unless of course its a dead marine animal but then that'd depend upon what sort of veggie you are, can you live on seaweed?

[rantal]

Like you, I two would eat the baby, by revulsion of eating a human is overcome by disinclination to take a life

Where's the problem? As you didn't say that you killed the animal in the same way you were not responsible for the stillborn baby so no need to overcome the revulsion, just eat the dead animal. Or are you saying you'd rather eat the baby than kill the animal and eat it? If so I think the revulsion could cause you to reassess your ethics in its light. If not I'm confused either way as how is it you could overcome this revulsion and not the one associated with killing an eating an animal? Or is it that you wish to stay true to your ethics? If so then eat the baby, heard it tastes like pork but best not tell your rescuers you had such a choice.

Personally I'd have my cake and eat it, so I'd bury the baby and go find the veg or fruit that must exist upon this island as if its a freshly killed animal then its either a carnivore or a herbivore and either way it means theres veg or fruit somewhere about. Unless of course its a dead marine animal but then that'd depend upon what sort of veggie you are, can you live on seaweed?

Sorry not to have made it clear, yes you have to kill the animal to eat it, there is insufficient plant food where you are and some people are dependent on you for their survival, though soon they will be able to travel to where you can find plant food. So the choise is, eat the baby or kill an animal and eat it. There is no cake here

all the best, rantal

[Arising_uk]

Sorry not to have made it clear, yes you have to kill the animal to eat it, there is insufficient plant food where you are and some people are dependent on you for their survival, though soon they will be able to travel to where you can find plant food. So the choise is, eat the baby or kill an animal and eat it. There is no cake here

Hmm...getting murkier. As in this case you'll have to abide by the majorities opinion and not your ethics and at least one, the mother, is not going to vote for your solution.

[rantal]

The mother is dead, you are avoiding the question. Which, perhaps says more about you than any answer

all the best, rantal

[Arising_uk]

The mother is dead, you are avoiding the question. Which, perhaps says more about you than any answer.

Then you are not reading what I said. As I agreed that you, as an ethical vegetarian, should eat the dead baby.

Why would the mother die? And if she has surely her last wish would be to eat her and not her baby. Plus there's more meat so you could feed more of these people you say need sustenance to start this walk to the veg.

Me, I'll burying both of them and killing the animal to sustain us.

[rantal]

Ok, sorry must have missed the you already said the ethical vegetarian should eat the baby. The mother could have died of something that made her body unedible or drowned in a swamp. The post is a thought experiment, to query the details is to miss the point

all the best, rantal