• yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    The only reason that “morals are deeply contextual” is that average people are dumb as shit in all the ways that matter. Moral reasoning is similar to mathematics, but whereas we have formalized math, which people study in school for 12+ years (and are still terrible at it), morality is a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants-and-do-your-best endeavor.

    That’s why there’s such a discrepancy between the opinions of ethicists and those of average people. Why we had slavery for 10,000 years, why Trump was elected. Why billionaires, religions, and cruise ships exist. Because average people are dumb as shit in all the ways that matter, and no discipline in the world reminds us just how close the average human is to a mindless animal than ethics.

    • wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 days ago

      We had slavery for thousands of years because the enlightenment occurred only a few hundred years ago and it brought about the concept of liberalism (not like liberal/conservative but liber like short for liberty or liberate - meaning freedom). Up until that point there was only basic pathos that would allow people to feel bad for a slave’s conditions but usually not to the extent that it would lead to a full abolition movement.

      • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        Yes. There were countless folks of every generation since time immemorial begging their fellow humans to use basic reasoning to see the evil of their actions. To no avail. It took thousands of years of social progress and education to convince (a plurality of) people of the most rudimentary and blatant moral facts. Because the average human is dumb as shit about everything that matters.

    • testfactor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      12 days ago

      Are you a vegan by chance?

      I feel like that’s the next big moral shift. People lionize dogs and cats, and harming one makes you literally Hitler. But there’s not a lick of difference between a dog and a cow.

      I think that an objective ethicist would absolutely say veganism is the only moral choice, and that anyone who isn’t a vegan is knowingly participating in unimaginable cruelty.

      But in our current context, only a small fraction of people care. Including a lot of people who look down on people of the past for not being as amazingly moral as they are.

      • spookex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        I mean, in the end an animal is an animal. I have had cats and dogs and don’t really like to see them hurt because (in the West) there is no purpose for their existence besides being pets.

        Cows and livestock, on the other hand, only exist for food and we keep breeding them for that.

        At the same time, is don’t really see a problem with the cultures that eat cats and dogs, in the end, it’s all just animals and it doesn’t matter if I think that some of them look cuter than others

        • Jack@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          11 days ago

          Many animals are smarter than severely mentally-disabled humans, yet we don’t torture and eat severely mentally-disabled humans. So it’s not about intelligence. It’s obviously also not about being able to feel pain, because animals can feel pain.

          Do you agree with “Don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want done to you”?

          If yes, would you be okay with genetically modified people who are much smarter and crueler than you, treating you like factory farmers and fishermen treat animals? 1-3 trillion fish are enslaved in torturous factory-farm conditions every year, and together with fishermen torture about 2-6 trillion fish to death annually, usually by slow asphyxiation. Hundreds of billions of land-animals (mostly chickens) are enslaved in torturous conditions every year and slaughtered. About 1% of chickens are boiled alive because it would cost more money to make sure the machines that kill them don’t miss that 1%. Dairy cows are repeatedly put on rape racks to be artificially inseminated, because they only give milk after delivering a calf. The calves are removed from their mothers, because the farmers don’t want the calves to drink the milk. Would you like to be kept your entire life in torturous conditions? Be tortured to death? You and/or your female family repeatedly artificially inseminated and made to give birth, then have the babies taken away so you and/or your female family’s milk can be harvested, eventually killed for hamburger when not yielding enough milk to make a profit?

            • Jack@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 days ago

              The reason many people say it’s OK to be complicit in factory farming animals, but not humans, is because humans are smarter: “they’re just animals”. Pointing out that factory farmed animals are smarter than severely mentally-disabled humans, shows it’s clearly not about intelligence. Speciesism is therefor similar to racism and sexism.

              What’s important is whether they can feel pain or not, not intelligence.

              Pointing out the lie isn’t gross. What is gross is torturing 3-6 trillion fish to death every year, and enslaving 1-3 trillion animals in torturous conditions every year.

              Dominion, Land of hope and glory, Earthlings

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 days ago

                comparing other races to animals is what racists do. comparing women to animals is what misogynists do. their fight for their own rights isn’t premised on their ability to feel pain, but the fact that they, too, are fully human.

                • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  “They deserve rights because they are human”, ah, okay. So being human is just a magical qualifier that determines whether or not you are entitled to the ability to live unimpeded. Every other species on the planet exists to serve the whims of humanity, for being human is special.

              • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 days ago

                You’re getting a lot of pushback and I can see why, but I’ve actually been coming to similar conclusions in a different way. It’s essentially species narcissism, just like we have racial narcissism, gender narcissism, physical narcissism, etc.

                But we exist within this planet and evolved with it as well. Factory farming, monoculture, and industrial farm practices are harmful for the planet and us and is pretty bad for many reasons. Being a heterotroph is not something we have control over, however. We consume other species, plant and animal and microbes alike, to get nutrients as do many other species. Even some autotrophs will eat other species.

                So it’s important to not continue to engage species narcissism and thus remove ourselves as participants living with this world.

            • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 days ago

              It would be gross if the comparison sought to belittle the mentally disabled, but the comparison is to point out the cruelty and inhumanity. It’s gross that you think it’s okay to cause pain and suffering because animals are “lesser” in your worldview.

                • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  Oh? If their existence isn’t lesser than humanity, then what issue do you take in comparing the value of their existence? 🤔 oh right, it’s not a strawman, you just aren’t smart enough to compete in an actual argument. Go back to school, champ.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 days ago

                in torture, the point is to cause pain. the pain incurred by animals in agriculture is incidental. it’s not the point of the practice. if there were some other options that were just as cost effective or cheaper, farmers would use them.

                • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  Actually, torture is a method by which people advance their goals. For example, you might torture someone to extract information. The point of the practice is to extract information, not necessarily cause pain. It just so happens that torture was the method they deemed most effective.

                  Have anything intelligent to say or are you just going to keep saying stupid shit?

      • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        Yes, I agree. In about a century folks will look back on modern humans as irredeemable monsters. And they would be right! This is an objective fact, and downvotes don’t change normative reality. More’s the pity.

        • Soulg@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 days ago

          I only see this happening if lab grown meat takes off in a really big way. Which I’m in favor of, but with how it’s been going I’m not so sure.

          • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            Assuming civilization (i.e., democracy) survives, it will happen. Democracy is almost ineluctable in promulgating moral progress. That’s one of the chief reasons that it’s under such sustained attack. Can’t have the poor and ignorant learning right from wrong.

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      There have always been societies that didn’t have slavery, they have happened on every continent (except that one) and in every sufficiently long era.