What is the vegan argument against eating dead animals? The vegan argument usually goes like this:. >animals can suffer

What is the vegan argument against eating dead animals?

The vegan argument usually goes like this:
>animals can suffer
>suffering is bad
>therefore causing animals to suffer is bad

But if the animal is dead, the ethical argument no longer applies. Dead animals cannot feel suffering, so by eating the dead animal, you are not causing more suffering, and therefore not doing anything morally wrong.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    It makes no sense as well, I mean why is it bad to kill animals when predators do it?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >why is it bad
      Obviously just going to bottom out in the vegan's subjective preference

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'm not a vegan, but I agree with the ethics of it.

      The difference is humans have a choice. Animals are stupid animals, they don't know what they are doing. A human can comprehend the suffering they are putting out into the world and make a conscious choice to improve it or be weak/lazy.

      I mean, think of a God that had a hand in creating the multiverse. And think they had the ability to make a better existence without child cancer or something, but they just chose not to because they just didn't feel like inconveniencing themselves - there's a lot of sentient creatures out there in various galaxies and who really cares. Maybe they got a favorite they actually take care of but it's not you. A bit like a child choosing to step on an anthill. I'd prefer that God to be more proactive than that and would dare to think them a petty lazy jerk. But if I can't do the same in my minor "godlike" power involving lesser beings I encounter myself what right do I have to complain?

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Why would God care about the problems of its creation?
        NTA

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The difference is humans have a choice.
        No we don't, we eat or die just like every other organism.

  2. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    when you buy meat you are paying some working stiff in another state to slaughter the animal.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      and?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      what if you find a sheep that just died

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      What if the animal was suffering and the butcher put it out of its misery?

  3. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Plants do not have a central nervous system, pain receptors, nerves, or a brain, so they likely can't feel pain in the same way that humans or other animals do. However, research has shown that plants can perceive and communicate physical stimuli and damage in sophisticated ways.

    For example, a team of scientists from Tel Aviv University discovered that some plants can emit a high-frequency distress sound when in environmental stress1. They tested tobacco plants and tomato plants by not watering them and by cutting off their stems. In both cases, the scientists found that the plants began to emit ultrasonic sounds that were between 20 and 100 kilohertz, which they believed could convey their distress to other organisms and plants within the vicinity.

    So while it's clear that plants respond to damage and environmental stress in complex ways, it's important to note that these responses are not equivalent to the experience of pain as understood in animals.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Found the baby killer and organ trafficker

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      actually plants do feel pain and distress

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >plants feel
      Obviously, they are living things. All living things feel. Even microbes
      It's not the same "feel" as in neurons firing to our nervous system, it still is feeling. All of the cells in our body feel, we are simply not conscious of it, we, the organism's nervous system. All this information is not deemed important to our function and thus isn't shared.
      Pain is an information of harm, harm is a threat to the organism's survival. We are informed of it so we can flee from/deal with the source. We want to avoid others from being harmed because they might perish and they contribute to the collective wellbeing that provide us with shelter and food.

      Livestock are food, the only reason to avoid them from being harmed is to ensure they grow and develop into the expected end-product we plan on consuming.

      There is still too much mysticism in modern ethics. All this "muh pain" nonsense that omitts the real reason why we seek to avoid pain.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >There is still too much mysticism in modern ethics. All this "muh pain" nonsense that omitts the real reason why we seek to avoid pain.
        It’s because this discussion is towing the line to people realizing that life has no intrinsic value. If people start believing that a human is equally worthless as a plant then society will collapse in on itself. Modern society only functions because of how widespread the belief of human exceptionalism is

  4. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Plants are alive to. So are bacteria. Am I not supposed to eat a salad or wash my hands?

    All life feeds on life. One thing cannot live without killing another, that's just the way it is. Now, you can choose what you want to kill, but dot pretends it doesn't make you a killer

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Technically when a fruit falls off a plant, it stops being alive. I don't think plants can really suffer.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, seeds are still alive inside the fruits. The function of fruits is to carry the seeds and spread them. They are organs meant to die off, like your mother's placenta.

  5. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I used to believe this (the pic). But ultimately, humans are not designed to live off plants. I didn't make that choice. Evolution/god did, whichever you like.

  6. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vegans dont all have the same opinion. Even people like vegan gains dont condemn meat eating when its in a survival situation. The point is minimising harm, so i think most vegans wouldn't have a moral problem with eating an animal thats already dead unless it was killed for the purpose of eating. In that case it would be supporting the meat industry and therefore contributing to more animals being killed in the future. Personally I dont like the idea of eating flesh in any situation.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >In that case it would be supporting the meat industry and therefore contributing to more animals being killed in the future
      Aren't those animals going to die anyway?

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        If everyone stopped eating meat there would be less demand therefore less animals killed.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          If no one ate meat, the animals that were bred for human consumption would not be born since there is no need for them.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            not that guy, but I think the point is that that's a good thing. There would be less suffering with less industrial livestock production.

  7. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Livestock suffering doesn't fricking matter, you're going to kill and eat those anyway.
    You want to treat them nicely to make yourself feel good? Food for the ego, ultimately pointless.

    Piggy and Moos at the farm aren't your fricking doggies and Mews. You dumb urbanite

  8. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I suppose it depends on how the animal came to be dead, and the circumstances under which its dead body came to be in your possession that you might eat it.

    If an animal leapt out in front of your car and was slain, or if you came upon a freshly dead body of an animal killed by someone else under similar circumstance, you could eat the meat without any ethical qualms. Likewise, you could eat the meat of an animal that was killed by someone else for purposes other than eating, such as for pest control or sport. In any scenario of that sort, where you did not intentionally kill the animal yourself and where its meat would otherwise have gone to waste, eating it is ethically neutral.

    But if an animal has been killed for the purpose of selling its meat in the supermarket, you cannot ethically eat that meat even though the animal was already dead when you found it, because you are contributing to an overall market demand for meat that will be filled by killing more animals.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >ethics
      Do not apply for non-people

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Suppose that I knew an animal was going to suffer horribly and die, so I killed it right before that could happen. Then I used the meat to feed my family who would otherwise starve, thus preventing them from suffering and possibly dying. Would that be ethical?

  9. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    We do not need to eat dead animals to survive
    There are animals which do need to eat dead animals in order to survive
    Therefore taking that valuable resource away from them is wrong
    I feel icky, you really want to eat a dead corpse? Wow what is wrong for you, you're ok with eating poo?
    Did you ask for permission to eat the animal from the animal before it died? No? Then you cannot eat it
    Yeah I don't see a problem with you eating it so long as you didn't deliberately hit it with your car, just don't try to act as if you're preventing the animal from going to waste, other animals will eat it
    Guys we need to focus on the real issue here which is the torture of billions of animals in industrial farms, this is such a ridiculous corner case and there is no point in discussing it, fight for animal liberation first!

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      We can eat dead animals to survive. Why shouldn't I be able to? Consent isn't really a thing with animals because they are incapable of consent. Do you ask your dog permission to take it to the vet and chop its balls off?
      >I feel icky
      Well I don't. Why should I change by behavior based on your feelings?

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        I think there is a large subset of vegans who have a disordered sense of empathy and this provides the strength behind the consent argument that a lot of vegans have
        I'm not sure if it's a mental illness but reading vegan discussions I'm certain that it is an actual thing
        Yes these types of vegans are bothered by desexing
        You can eat dead animals to survive but you don't need to eat dead animals to survive therefore you shouldn't
        This kind of shows itself in Vegan discussions around the third world
        Now as we know, animals especially pigs but also goats and sheep, are really great at making fat and protein from scraps and therefore a lot of the third world needs animals in order to survive even if it is just milk
        Most vegans I've seen will choose to not judge these people because they see it as a real need for survival

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >You can eat dead animals to survive but you don't need to eat dead animals to survive therefore you shouldn't
          This is a dumb argument.
          >You don't need to shower to survive, therefore you shouldn't.
          >You don't need to wipe your ass to survive, therefore you shouldn't.
          >You don't need to have sex to survive, therefore you shouldn't.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Oh frick, I just realised OP isn't talking about road kill
            It's interesting that in Buddhism, a monk is allowed to eat meat if it was provided to him as alms
            If you purchased the meat then you're supporting an industry which causes massive suffering to animals

            I think a lot of vegan discussions are really about providing ethical heuristics to live by and for a lot of vegans they experience so much anxiety about the world that they live in that they just choose the simplest heuristic of all
            So we have the case of the dead animal on the road
            A vegan will say that taking that dead animal is wrong because there are animals who are carnivorous who would need to eat that animal and since they don't need to eat the animal they're causing those animals to potentially starve
            At the same time a vegan will be confronted by the deaths of small mammals, birds and insects which industrial farming involves and will say that, because they need to eat something it is ok
            A lot of them will fall back on the maxim which is that their movement is about reducing the amount of suffering in the world

            The argument is literally: "Eating a dead animal is the same as eating your dead grandma"

            Seriously. I'm paraphrazing.

            I've seen vegans claim that the reason why they don't eat food that has been deep fried in oil that was used to cook meat is because it'd be like deep frying a baby in the oil and then asking non-vegans to eat fried potatoes that were cooked in that oil

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >it'd be like deep frying a baby in the oil and then asking non-vegans to eat fried potatoes that were cooked in that oil
            Do vegans actually do this?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            The mentally ill ones do
            It reminds me of contamination OCD

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            They actually cook babies in oil and make people eat it?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            No?
            Do you know what an analogy is?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I've seen vegans claim that the reason why they don't eat food that has been deep fried in oil that was used to cook meat is because it'd be like deep frying a baby in the oil and then asking non-vegans to eat fried potatoes that were cooked in that oil
            It really took me some time to understand what I was even reading. First minute I'm reading about the usage of cooking oil and the next minute about cooking babies. Yeah I'm done with thinking about this nonsense.

  10. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    The argument is literally: "Eating a dead animal is the same as eating your dead grandma"

    Seriously. I'm paraphrazing.

  11. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    One of their most valid arguments is that factory farming is undeniable cruel and unusual.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Wait, what is cruel and unusual about it?

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        They are given too little space, painful sores are ignored, at it's most human they are given too little of most everything that makes being alive as a sentient being not awful and tortuous.

        This is vague but I think if you just google any kind of vegan propaganda with video evidence you will find and hear things that will inspire you to sympathy.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          I have watched vodeos of animal farms. They are designed to maximize efficiency and health of the animals. Why would they want to torture animals for fun? Wouldn't that be against their financial interests?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >They are designed to maximize efficiency and health of the animals.
            yeah, until they don’t need them anymore. They care about their health, not their happiness

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why the frick would they care about their happiness? How do you measure chicken happiness?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            were you not the anon asking how factory farming is cruel and unusual? Watch the gif, tard

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            What is cruel and unusual about that? What is chicken "happiness"? Chickens don't have feelings.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            what animals do have feelings? You’re not going to try to argue that only humans have feelings, right?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You’re not going to try to argue that only humans have feelings, right?
            Yes. How do you measure chicken happiness? Do you ask them how they are feeling?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            theres no qualitative way to measure happiness, not even in humans. Not displaying emotion doesn’t mean you don’t have it, either

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ok so why should we care about chicken happiness when it's unclear that chickens can even be happy?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I do feel bad for all animals (I won't stop eating them though, sorry) except chickens. I spent several weeks nursing a chicken back to health when the people who sold me them said they weren't worth the vet bill to fix. They told me just to kill it, but after a lot of nightly effort, it recovered and seemed happy. The other chickens then proceeded to kill the chicken I had saved for weakness.

            Behead all chickens.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            humans have done even worse on countless occasions. We’re no better than them. Should we behead all humans too?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            and my soul just dropped out of my ass, Ive heard of picrel but never have I actually seen it, wow

  12. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Actually very few animals have neurons that are adapted to detect pain. That was a development after that central nervous system and also after the development of the spinal cord. Reminds me of my old bioethics lecturer saying you can do any experiments you like on bugs because "if you don't have a spine you don't have rights."
    As far as animal welfare goes, we should pave the entire planet and turn it into a massive factory producing only nutrients IF we would be better off. As it stands we need fresh air, clean water, beautiful vistas, diverse ecosystems, and unprocessed foods to be healthy. Our livestock also need these things in order to produce high quality products for our consumption. I don't give a frick about animals but we need to take care of them in order to take care of ourselves. I'm also under the impression all greenies that make a living personifying animals and guilt tripping politicians should be gassed. Lets not kid ourselves into thinking you can live "ethically" under their warped definition. The circle of life needs death. Predators eat prey to return their nutrients to the producers. All dirt is made of corpses.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >if your body doesn’t use neurons you CANNOT AT ALL DETECT if damage is being done to you (aka sensing pain)
      your professor was moronic. Fricking amoebas recognize when they are in physical danger.

      Also it’s not like all factory-farmed animals don’t have a frontal cortex and nervous system so I don’t know how you mental gymnastic’d around that to argue that humans deserve rights but those animals dont

  13. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not /misc/. Go back.

  14. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'd eat people just as readily as I do beef. Cry about it.

  15. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >If the animal is dead, the argument no longer applies
    The vegan argument isn't against eating road kill or anything.

    There's not a 100% economic link between funding scum who lobby for scum and expand their evil business, it's not causing direct animal death, sure. But the link is definitely there.

    And besides, if you were to try to make a genuine attempt to be a person worthy of a world with minimal animal suffering, you likely wouldn't do so in good faith while being reliant on animal products. I don't think veganism is possible when people just don't go vegan, push the issue to the bottom of the pile, act like we just need to vote for policy, and go "awww, thats the 2nd decade in a row we haven't accomplished anything bc we want to focus on something else? Oh well. *munches on bacon*

    I think more and more people are starting to believe it's silly to argue that animal sentience isn't a thing or that commercially farmed animals are treated well. But there's no end to people just not being emotionally available towards the topic. Everyone seems to have their own excuse not to be a vegan even if they believe animal suffering should be avoided. There's the tu quo que "well I can't be perfect/you're a hypocrite. X is immoral but we/you still do it anyway, so why should I become a vegan?/why don't you change yourself more? You see? You just can't expect that from ppl" Or the hopeless "they're gonna kill the animal anyway no matter what I do! I can't make any difference." It's really sad.

    I am a hypocrite. I'm a vegan. I think being a vegan is a difficult step to take, but it's not a giant leap or anything. Trying to be consistent with your values is a very difficult thing for anyone to do. I think being vegan is noble even if I morally disagree with your reasons. My agnostic brothers and sisters who can acknowledge that anything, no matter how much they might not like it, could be moral or immoral, I have a special fondness for this kind of person.

  16. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Plants can suffer, too. The vegan argument really doesn't make sense unless you start tiering life in terms of value.

  17. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Well, I hope we can do good and cheap lab grown meat someday.
    But that won't stop suffering in nature that wild animals inflict on each other.
    Frick the Demiurge.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *