Yes, slaves are super convenient. No one ever said that slaves aren’t nice to have, dude. YOUR experience is not the fucking point.
There is no way to create a creature for the express purpose of exploitation that is okay. There is no way to create a creature with the intention of forcing it into a state of total dependence that is not actually evil.
Yes! Good on you for noticing the speciesism that racism is built on! If non-human animals have less worth than humans then liking some humans to non-human animals means they have less worth. The issue is at the very start, that
a) non-human animal and human are a meaningful distinction
b) non-humans have inherently less worth than humans
I would argue that animal husbandry is a symbiotic relationship rather than simple exploitation. While we gain resources, animals receive guaranteed food, protection from predators, and medical care that they would otherwise lack in the wild. Overall, the life with humans is better for the animals from a survival standpoint. Mind you, I’m only talking about animal husbandry on a smaller scale, not those disgusting meat factories as seen in the image above.
And before you drop the “How can a relationship be symbiotic if the animal has no choice in its dependence?” question that I’ve heard so many times before: Symbiosis is defined by mutual benefit instead of autonomy. Many biological partnerships happen without conscious choice, such as the relationship between fungi and algae in lichens, or ants and the small things they herd (forgot what they are called in english lmao). The lack of choice is offset by a massive increase in survival rates and resource stability compared to life in the wild.
You realize putting googly eyes on a toaster doesn’t give it feelings, right?
Assigning human values and desires to non-humans is not a coherent philosophy or ethical position.
Animals “Exploit” each other throughout the animal kingdom. Ants Literally farm aphids by protecting and herding them in exchange for what they produce. How is this wildly different from keeping a cow or a goat for milk?
Is the cow version evil because we’re humans, but the ant version okay because they aren’t?
Because that’s just making rules based on your desired outcome, not reason.
Yes, slaves are super convenient. No one ever said that slaves aren’t nice to have, dude. YOUR experience is not the fucking point.
There is no way to create a creature for the express purpose of exploitation that is okay. There is no way to create a creature with the intention of forcing it into a state of total dependence that is not actually evil.
comparing slaves to animals is what slavers do
Yes! Good on you for noticing the speciesism that racism is built on! If non-human animals have less worth than humans then liking some humans to non-human animals means they have less worth. The issue is at the very start, that
a) non-human animal and human are a meaningful distinction
b) non-humans have inherently less worth than humans
speciesism is necessary. racism is bad.
for once in your life make an argument and don’t just throw out claims.
what I said is true. nothing more need be said
I would argue that animal husbandry is a symbiotic relationship rather than simple exploitation. While we gain resources, animals receive guaranteed food, protection from predators, and medical care that they would otherwise lack in the wild. Overall, the life with humans is better for the animals from a survival standpoint. Mind you, I’m only talking about animal husbandry on a smaller scale, not those disgusting meat factories as seen in the image above.
And before you drop the “How can a relationship be symbiotic if the animal has no choice in its dependence?” question that I’ve heard so many times before: Symbiosis is defined by mutual benefit instead of autonomy. Many biological partnerships happen without conscious choice, such as the relationship between fungi and algae in lichens, or ants and the small things they herd (forgot what they are called in english lmao). The lack of choice is offset by a massive increase in survival rates and resource stability compared to life in the wild.
So it’s fucked up to have pets because they fully depend on you? 🤔
Yeah, pet ownership is not considered vegan. On account of, you know, owning a sentient being, treating it as property.
I’ll have to inform my vegan friends that they’re fucking posers 👍
Go do that maybe they’ll teach you something about the difference between owning a pet and adopting an animal
You realize putting googly eyes on a toaster doesn’t give it feelings, right?
Assigning human values and desires to non-humans is not a coherent philosophy or ethical position.
Animals “Exploit” each other throughout the animal kingdom. Ants Literally farm aphids by protecting and herding them in exchange for what they produce. How is this wildly different from keeping a cow or a goat for milk?
Is the cow version evil because we’re humans, but the ant version okay because they aren’t?
Because that’s just making rules based on your desired outcome, not reason.