More rhetoric...

[Guest guest]

Me again… And I agree with you Dave, this is a very

interesting discussion, I’m just sometimes a little

surprised by the messages I’m getting from a Vegan

list… As James who in one of last messages said: “I am

also not necessarily, personally, pro-animal rights,

(I acknowledge that many vegans are as much due to

ethical concerns about nonhuman animals, I'm just not

among them)” then why are you even on this list? I

heard the ‘NRA’ and ‘Republican veal cookery’ mailing

lists are pretty interesting… Just teasing

 

Anyway enough with the personal jabs… I just also find

it intriguing that James’ answers to my arguments are

only what other people think: “it is a criticism made

against it, and a problem many people have with it.”

“Some people agree that justice is invented *but want

it anyway.*” “I suggest you read some of the

criticisms of Peter Singer's writing and of

utilitarianism in general.” I don’t care what others

believe in, tell me YOUR opinion. Unless your opinion

is resulting to empty nihilism and claiming that all

moral philosophies are arbitrary. Which by the way is

absolutely correct but I simply do not wish to live in

a world totally lacking any moral restraints (though

it would probably look a lot like the world we have

right now). My ultimate goal is to try to make this

planet ever more slightly livable for both humans and

animals and I seriously doubt that nihilism will get

us there, maybe some do, and given your lack of

concern for animals you’re probably one of them…

 

And as for you criticism of my definition of

utilitarianism, “Maximize pleasure, minimize pain " is

an accurate summary of the philosophy, although I

perhaps should’ve added from the point of view of the

universe, whereas hedonism is simply from the point of

view of the individual.

 

As for Dave, you believe that killing one animal to

save a million is ethically wrong since it infringes

on the rights of that one individual to live. But

doesn’t these million other individuals also have a

right to live, and aren’t we infringing on their right

to live by not sacrificing that one individual. If you

believe killing the one is wrong, then you must also

believe that killing the million is also wrong and

when we arrive at such a moral impasse I feel it is

best to give priority to those million individuals,

all other factors being equal…

And if you believe that killing an individual is wrong

or that everyone has intrinsic rights, please explain

why this is so. I don’t think killing is inherently

wrong (in my opinion nothing is) and again I would

encourage (humbly) that you read “What’s wrong with

killing?” by my good friend Peter Singer.

Anyway, enough rambling for today, but please don’t

take these attacks personally, I’m sure you’re both

great guys and I definitely don’t want this list to

turn into some of these socialist groups I’m part of,

who are too busy arguing the hell out of each other

over some obscure details than focus on ways to combat

capitalism… We should never forget that one unites us

will always be stronger than one seperates us in our

fight against exploitation...

All for now, (and thanks for the AR/Welfare definition

Dave)

Kamrinn,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Send FREE video emails in Mail!

http://promo./videomail/

[Guest guest]

Kamrinn Roy at kamrinn wrote:

 

> Me again… And I agree with you Dave, this is a very

> interesting discussion, I’m just sometimes a little

> surprised by the messages I’m getting from a Vegan

> list… As James who in one of last messages said: “I am

> also not necessarily, personally, pro-animal rights,

> (I acknowledge that many vegans are as much due to

> ethical concerns about nonhuman animals, I'm just not

> among them)” then why are you even on this list? I

> heard the ‘NRA’ and ‘Republican veal cookery’ mailing

> lists are pretty interesting… Just teasing

 

::shrug:: I'm on the list because I'm a vegan. The name of the list is

, not planet-animal rights.

 

> Anyway enough with the personal jabs… I just also find

> it intriguing that James’ answers to my arguments are

> only what other people think: “it is a criticism made

> against it, and a problem many people have with it.”

> “Some people agree that justice is invented *but want

> it anyway.*” “I suggest you read some of the

> criticisms of Peter Singer's writing and of

> utilitarianism in general.” I don’t care what others

> believe in, tell me YOUR opinion.

 

I'm happy to tell you my opinion (and already have), but want to point out

that me writing that was not a dodging of saying my opinion, I simply wanted

to clarify that what you were saying was my opinion was actually not.

 

It is entirely valid to tell you what other people think if this is a

philosophical discussion. I am talking about major objections to an ethical

theory.. if an ethical theory is to be successful, people have to follow it,

and I pointed out one of the reasons people aren't interested in following

utilitarianism. MY opinion is far LESS relevant than other peoples', in

this case.

 

> Unless your opinion

> is resulting to empty nihilism and claiming that all

> moral philosophies are arbitrary.

 

Well, that is my opinion, and I've already said both that I am a nihilist

and that I think all ethical philosophies are equally arbitrary so I'm not

sure what you're looking for from me by way of opinion other than that.

 

> Which by the way is

> absolutely correct

 

You have a really absolutist view about these things. Thanks for letting me

know that my opinion is " correct " about such a subjective matter that no one

(of " mere mortals " , at least) knows for sure.

 

> but I simply do not wish to live in

> a world totally lacking any moral restraints (though

> it would probably look a lot like the world we have

> right now). My ultimate goal is to try to make this

> planet ever more slightly livable for both humans and

> animals and I seriously doubt that nihilism will get

> us there, maybe some do, and given your lack of

> concern for animals you’re probably one of them…

 

That's fine, I have no problem with you wanting to develop an ethical

philosophy and wanting others to do the same.

 

 

-james.