• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Does One Require Ignorance or Cognitive Dissonance to Watch Pornography or Eat Meat?

Status
Not open for further replies.

olympia

Member
Some of the comparisons being made in this thread are ridiculous. It's far easier to avoid eating meat and watching porn than it is to avoid products of sweatshop labor. Furthermore, if you knew your habits were a direct cause of suffering, why wouldn't you make an effort to change them?
 

Air

Banned
I don't think so. First, I don't really see the issue with watching porn. Second, I am aware of the suffering of animals for me to consume them and be apart of my diet. That said, I'm a panpsychist so I think everything is conscious to a degree (obviously there are more complex life forms, a human could be more conscious than a plant), so regardless of what I consume, I'd be eating something that I believe has a conscious experience. It's much worse for animals because of the additional complexity (feelings of pain, perhaps some have a sense of self, etc.), so I would be willing to forgo eating animals once we can create adequate substitutes.

Some of the comparisons being made in this thread are ridiculous. It's far easier to avoid eating meat and watching porn than it is to avoid products of sweatshop labor. Furthermore, if you knew your habits were a direct cause of suffering, why wouldn't you make an effort to change them?

Convenience reigns supreme.
 

olympia

Member
Convenience reigns supreme.

I have the means to stop eating meat, so I did, in fact plenty people in America do. It wasn't easy, but sometimes doing the moral thing isn't easy. Yet, I don't have the means or resources to avoid consumer technology.
 
Throwing your hands up and saying 'there is nothing I can do to stop this evil so I'm justified in perpetuating it' is unquestionably a kind of cognitive dissonance.

it's more a case of "most animals used for meat consumption are killed humanely and I don't eat meat often anyway so I don't care"

not a fan of fur and all that but that's not what the thread is about
 
The reason no scientist says plants experience pain the same way is because there is no way to know for certain due to a communication barrier. The only reason we 'know' animals experience pain similarly is because they can scream in a way we can hear and is distressing to us. While the articles I mentioned initially talked about how plants do something very similar, but with exuding chemicals and screams we can't hear. There is evidence that it is a very real possibility and shouldn't be discounted simply because hurting an animal makes us feel bad but hurting a plant does not. Arguing otherwise is the equivalent to saying just because you can't hear someone scream means they don't feel pain, which is an obvious logic flaw.

In regards to your metaphor, I thought I was fairly clear. Putting a kitten in a blender seems like the worse option to people, because we feel empathy for kittens, they're pets and display emotion audibly. Mowing the grass kills many plants, while the kitten is just one kitten. Along with what I was saying about how plants are on the same level as non-sapient animals, that means mowing the grass is a worse moral crime than putting a kitten in a blender.

Oh, and humans ARE kept in factory farms for their flesh. It's called the US minimum wage. And that's just the obvious/witty answer without going into black market slavery or totalitarian states.

That is some hardcore mental gymnastics to justify killing animals. Can you share those articles?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom