Re: Vegtarian posses a dilemma for fellow vegetarians
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 8:26 pm
I am curious to know if you read the question?
all the best, rantal
all the best, rantal
For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Utilitarianism?rantal wrote: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.John K wrote:I guess the real question is would the vegetarian act like Socrates; would he forfeit life in order to embrace the philosophy?
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
No, not really more a deontological vs squemishness!John K wrote:Utilitarianism?rantal wrote: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.John K wrote:I guess the real question is would the vegetarian act like Socrates; would he forfeit life in order to embrace the philosophy?
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
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 childRortabend wrote: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.
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.rantal wrote:Like you, I two would eat the baby, by revulsion of eating a human is overcome by disinclination to take a life
Arising_uk wrote: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.rantal wrote:Like you, I two would eat the baby, by revulsion of eating a human is overcome by disinclination to take a life
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?
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 wrote:
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
Then you are not reading what I said. As I agreed that you, as an ethical vegetarian, should eat the dead baby.rantal wrote:The mother is dead, you are avoiding the question. Which, perhaps says more about you than any answer.