"I’m a bit confused now of where your arguments for vegetarianism are coming from."
i am somewhat confused myself as to the role tacitly cast for me. i never intended to defend vegetarianism, for i do not entirely agree with it.
"You say it is your hunger that drives you to determine that vegetables are better to eat than meat, but why would hunger alone do this?"
i am afraid that you have mistaken. i wrote that if i were uncertain about what i may eat, hunger would drive me to find the answer.
"Everyone is hungry, but not many are concerned about what is OK to eat and what is not, that is, in terms of the amount of suffering, pain, and so forth."
i shall take this as a compliment.
"It seems contradictory that, on one hand, you do not care about the ecological damages that we humans are causing to the earth, which cause millions of creatures to suffer (say testing of nuclear bombs in the Pacific Islands), but on the other, you are concerned about the amount of suffering you cause to cows and chickens."
i think you are again mistaken. i do care about ecological damage, because a damaged ecology would not be amenable to human survival. i am not particularly "concerned about the amount of suffering you cause to cows and chickens" because my concerns are primarily for human beings.
"If the former is just a natural course of things, and you see nothing wrong with it, then why does cows and chickens concern you? After all, there are creatures that benefit off of our slaughtering of cows and chickens, just as there are those that benefit off of the damages that we cause to the ecological system."
A Random Comment from May 19, 2002
hi dyske,
"I’m a bit confused now of where your arguments for vegetarianism are coming from."
i am somewhat confused myself as to the role tacitly cast for me. i never intended to defend vegetarianism, for i do not entirely agree with it.
"You say it is your hunger that drives you to determine that vegetables are better to eat than meat, but why would hunger alone do this?"
i am afraid that you have mistaken. i wrote that if i were uncertain about what i may eat, hunger would drive me to find the answer.
"Everyone is hungry, but not many are concerned about what is OK to eat and what is not, that is, in terms of the amount of suffering, pain, and so forth."
i shall take this as a compliment.
"It seems contradictory that, on one hand, you do not care about the ecological damages that we humans are causing to the earth, which cause millions of creatures to suffer (say testing of nuclear bombs in the Pacific Islands), but on the other, you are concerned about the amount of suffering you cause to cows and chickens."
i think you are again mistaken. i do care about ecological damage, because a damaged ecology would not be amenable to human survival. i am not particularly "concerned about the amount of suffering you cause to cows and chickens" because my concerns are primarily for human beings.
"If the former is just a natural course of things, and you see nothing wrong with it, then why does cows and chickens concern you? After all, there are creatures that benefit off of our slaughtering of cows and chickens, just as there are those that benefit off of the damages that we cause to the ecological system."
all true but beside the point.