RE: Veganism?
February 2, 2012 at 3:45 am
(This post was last modified: February 2, 2012 at 3:50 am by genkaus.)
(February 1, 2012 at 5:49 pm)Chuck Wrote: Anything with a certain number neuron can passably be said to be capable of choice.
But is it really capable of choice?
(February 1, 2012 at 5:49 pm)Chuck Wrote: But purpose is only meaningful to the mind that can plan. A mind that can plan can incorporate anything it wants into its plans and therefore assign any purpose it deems fit to anything. A mind that can not plan can not give purpose to anything. Outside the plan one intends to carry out nothing has any purpose in any meaningful sense of the word.
I agree that only a mind capable of making a plan can assign purpose. To be clear, I do not consider a choice to have been made if the mind is incapable of planning according or towards it. But I disagree that such a mind can assign purpose to "anything".
For example, I have a mind capable of planning but that does not mean I can assign purpose to your life. There are limits to what we can assign purpose to.
(February 1, 2012 at 5:49 pm)Chuck Wrote: So the fact that a cow may be able to make the choice of not killing itself does not mean it has any purpose other than that which I assign it. I assign its purpose in light of my plan to satiate my taste for beef.
IF the cow is making a choice, then it is capable of having a purpose for its own life. In that case, you cannot assign a contrary purpose to its life. Thankfully for your taste buds, I don't think cows have that capacity.
(February 1, 2012 at 7:59 pm)Minimalist Wrote: It is sort of what being on the top of the food chain is all about. I assure you that if you are out in the Arctic and run out of bullets some polar bear will soon demonstrate that HE is on the top of the chain.
That is argument from the "natural law". It is invalid because just because we can eat meat, does not mean we should.
Once again, what would be your argument against cannibalism?
(February 1, 2012 at 8:18 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Wait a minute, some objects have intrinsic value. For a simple example, eggs can be used as food. That says nothing about meaning, it is just a value that is wholely contained within the egg.
No, the value is assigned externally. Eggs can be used as food, but unless there is a need for food, there will be no value attached to the egg.
If something is said to have value, it means it is valuable to someone. How valuable eggs would be if no one needed to eat?
