Do you agree with Richard Dawkins?

[kılıç_mehmet]

[/b]Richard Dawkins can see no good moral reason for eating meat. He sees it as being akin to sexism or racism.

It seems that evolution tells us that we are nothing more than another animal so it's easy to see where Dawkins is coming from.

I suppose that you need to have a moral position that causing unnecessary pain and suffering is wrong.

Do you agree with Dawkins that on moral grounds, eating meat cannot be justified?

I would like to have a list of quotes first, sir. I know Richard Dawkins, however, I'm not very well versed with his writings, so I'd like a direct quotation to make up my mind.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

So no matter what Dawkins says, he's going to have to technically kill something to survive..

Indeed. Jains for example will not kill rats which get into their food.Some will brush their path lest they step on an insect. Some will strain their drinking water lest they swallow and kill some small floating insect.

As for natural selection: I have long been under the impression that meat eating was an important factor in natural selection: Hominids who became predators rather than just grazers obtained far more iron, which allowed their brains to get bigger more quickly,which enhanced their chances of survival. Have I misunderstood?

[mediamogul]

I am a vegetarian an believe that the moral line is drawn at sentience (consciousness and the ability to suffer). All beings that have sentience are entitled to certain rights and ethical treatment. To discriminate purely on the basis of the fact the we are humans and they are not is akin to speciesm or the unfounded favoring of one species over another due to prejudice for the species that we happen to belong to. We understand these concepts well in the cases of our pets and preferred creatures, usually drawn along social lines, but struggle with the animals we classically view as "food". I do not eat any animal that we have reason to believe is sentient.

I also must say that it's funny to hear otherwise rational folks break out the lame arguments for this one. Especially when they would never accept the same type of arguments from a person arguing religion or some other belief based upon tradition, taste, or prejudice.

The classics are 1) Because that is the natural order of things 2) Because that's what people have always done 3) Because morality is relative and I choose to eat meat because there is no right or wrong 4) Because it tastes good and wouldn't taste good if it weren't "meant" to be eaten.

The answers are simple: 1) Is-Ought gap. Just because something is a certain way doesn't mean it ought to be that way. Our biology is based on survival not ethics and thus is amoral and can't be used as a basis for what we are "meant" to eat. 2) Argument from tradition obvious nonsense 3) But you wouldn't eat a human baby why? If it's relative you could never say someone was wrong for doing so? If we couldn't eat a baby why not? Moral relativism is bankrupt and the refuge of many armchair philosophers who can't put forth a compelling moral theory. 4) That one is obviously stupid and needs no response.

i knew a non-meateater would call out some of the justifications here. they were lame from a scientific perspective but it's the truth, meat is delish! i will clean a rib like nobody's business, you would never know it ever had meat on it. lol.

i plan to donate my body/organs/parts to science anyway, whatever isn't used can be put into the ground without a box, and just absorbed back into the same earth that i come from. so, i feel it's an even swap - i eat animals and some get to eat what's left of me.

So the answer is that you know the argument is illogical but don't care and you are going to continue with the unfounded practices anyway?

Sounds like another system of thought I know.

*cough*Christianity*cough*

[Minimalist]

All beings that have sentience are entitled to certain rights and ethical treatment.

So we can kill and eat fundies? Red wine or white?

[LiberalHearted]

I'm a vegetarian, and have from time to time rescued poor animals from the street and adopted them.

It does cause me alarm when, what is eaten is purposely harmed. Finding out can't be good for the digestion.

I speak from experience, since I've turned vegetarian, my system works better (and I take pain relievers which constipate but do not now.) (TMI, I know) This experience in vegetarianism seems to have corrected many stomach problems of mine which was a true sickness, not supposed to relieve oneself through the mouth.

It has been kinder to me, and from the literature from various animal rescue groups kinder to the animals.

As my Grandpa always said 'everything wants to live'; wisdom I didn't adhere to but now the cycle of 'kindness' reverberates back to me.

You have to realize that each person is different. I can eat meat without any of those issues.. However, my main diet is mostly fruit.. My house is packed with fruits. Now vegetarianism is your choice, and it is a healthy choice giving that we have evolved from herbivores. But evolution has also made the human species now largely omnivorous.

BTW, my cat came from an old burnt out trailer. I found her while four wheeling back trails. Me and my friends came across this trailer and found her inside what appeared to be the remains of the back bedroom. Took her to the vet, and they told me that she would be put to sleep if I didn't choose to keep her.. Had her now for 16 years.

I do realize that I'm different in this matter of course. Omnivores are the majority. I just lost my taste for meat, and of course the physical aspect. What sealed me, was a few videos on cruelty. Up until that point it was strictly organics.

Fruit you have me there, I can't buy enough. Last night I 'got' the last banana and was overjoyed (crazy)

Lovely, too the rescued cat. The same thing happened while walking one of my dogs, a stray just going around the block....they said he'd be put to death and I couldn't let that happen. The dog I was walking was called Nada - he wasn't going to be kept either hence the name.

My oldest cat is about 20 years old, a rescue and I'm beside myself because she is still alive. The ASPCA vets have told me that rescues don't life long. The experience came true many times, but this one lasted. I always say 'we grew up together'.

So I'm a mush.

It is up to the individual to decide either for health reasons or desires to eat as they are able to do. Something I agree with.

If indeed RD stated eating meat wast cruel. Say for his conscience; I agree. If the statement is made up, I have seen videos on how cruel industries treat animals, and agree anyway.

Eating as I do now is a bonus at that point for me, and the animal.

[mediamogul]

All beings that have sentience are entitled to certain rights and ethical treatment.

So we can kill and eat fundies? Red wine or white?

True. Many lack a nervous system capable of supporting consciousness.

I wonder if they wouldn't be a little gamey?

[Minimalist]

Cook them with garlic and onions.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

All beings that have sentience are entitled to certain rights and ethical treatment.

No they are not.


There are no such things as innate rights. There are legal and customary rights,which can be (and are) taken away at the whim of the powerful. That makes them privileges.


You may well disagree. In that case please explain the origins of such rights and the universal, external moral authority which decides,imposes and enforces such rights..

---

Cook them with garlic and onions.

Well not necessarily. I think our laws may be a bit different. We are obliged to stick to children under 3 years.We usually marinate them with a base of decent red wine for 2 days.( in the fridge, turning occasionally)

Waste not want not;we use the parents for dog food and compost..

[TheJackel]

So the answer is that you know the argument is illogical but don't care and you are going to continue with the unfounded practices anyway?

Sounds like another system of thought I know.

*cough*Christianity*cough*

How is eating meat an unfounded practice?? The Irony of your statement here is precious to say the least... There was nothing illogical about the answer given. And as said before, you have to end a life to continue to have a life. Welcome to reality! You just feel better killing plants because they can't cry or scream when you kill them, and that is perfectly ok. However, to use it as an argument for the preaching of vegetarianism borders the line of religious radicalism since it often uses bullshit dogma about claiming people eating meat are some how unethical, or engaging in "unfounded practices"... Sorry, but the bullshit trains stops where you kill another living thing just so you can have another breath.

[Justtristo]

Richard Dawkins understanding of philosophy, especially ethics is much left to be desired.

Richard Carrier (an Atheist who understands ethics quite well) makes an excellent case that eating meat is ethical.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/87