Will humanity come back to cannibalism?

[altaylar2000]

If we had a clear ethical boundary: not to destroy the life of another creature that feels, for food, this would be out of the question.
But here, in modern ethics, everything is based on the ephemeral assumption that human life is more valuable than the life of an animal. It is a stone's throw from such a postulate to cannibalism, if it is recognized that the lives of some people are more valuable than the lives of others.
Moreover, the statement about the a priori higher value of a person's life is not substantiated by anything. On the contrary, from the point of view of traditional morality, man is mired in sin, and animals are cleaner, at least herbivores

This principle has not yet been officially recognized, but in fact that it is already being implemented, in particular, there is information that there is a semi-legal sale of organs in Uyghur concentration camps.
It's not exactly the same, but it's from the same category.

Moreover, a human consumes meat not even out of necessity, but only for pleasure, since it is possible to provide complete protein nutrition on the basis of dairy products and eggs.

Edited April 3, 2021 by altaylar2000

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, altaylar2000 said:

On the contrary, from the point of view of traditional morality, man is mired in sin, and animals are cleaner, at least herbivores

Herbivore's are the worst, they do everything they can to prevent a predator from eating...

[Bufofrog]

2 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

But here, in modern ethics, everything is based on the ephemeral assumption that human life is more valuable than the life of an animal.

I don't think this is a modern belief, its been around for quite a while.  Do you think if someone hits a chicken with there car they should be prosecuted for vehicular homicide?

[altaylar2000]

9 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

I don't think this is a modern belief, its been around for quite a while.  Do you think if someone hits a chicken with there car they should be prosecuted for vehicular homicide?

This is manslaughter.
For this, by the way, and so in some places they can attract, but this does not apply to ethics, for damage to property

[Bufofrog]

2 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

This is manslaughter.

I think it is chickenslaughter

 

4 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

For this, by the way, and so in some places they can attract, but this does not apply to ethics, for damage to property

Yes, it is about property because ethically a human life is much more important than a freaking chicken.  

[altaylar2000]

1 minute ago, Bufofrog said:

Yes, it is about property because ethically a human life is much more important than a freaking chicken.  

Not in my ethics. I'll trade billions of villains' lives for one chicken

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Not in my ethics. I'll trade billions of villains' lives for one chicken

Do you also get to decide who is and is not a villain?

[Bufofrog]

5 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Not in my ethics. I'll trade billions of villains' lives for one chicken

Who decides which of these billion people you want to murder is a villian.  I'll bet their mothers won't agree with you.  

Edit: cross posted with iNow.

Edited April 3, 2021 by Bufofrog

[dimreepr]

3 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

Moreover, a human consumes meat not even out of necessity, but only for pleasure, since it is possible to provide complete protein nutrition on the basis of dairy products and eggs.

You mean our animal slaves?

7 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Not in my ethics. I'll trade billions of villains' lives for one chicken

Define "villains'"...

Do you mean your chicken slaves?

Ethic's mean's different thing's, depending on which side of the cutlery one's viewing.

3 hours ago, altaylar2000 said:

But here, in modern ethics, everything is based on the ephemeral assumption that human life is more valuable than the life of an animal. It is a stone's throw from such a postulate to cannibalism, if it is recognized that the lives of some people are more valuable than the lives of others.

Isn't your life more valuable than a stranger?

Edited April 3, 2021 by dimreepr

[altaylar2000]

8 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Define "villains'"...

Who does evil. Predator, aferist, parasite and so on
Maybe the translator is cheating on me, I mean "evil doer" is it correct translate?

May be the word "evildoer" more correct for this case?

[iNow]

Do you also get to decide who is and is not evil?

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, altaylar2000 said:

Who does evil. Predator, aferist, parasite and so on

Have you ever taken antibiotics? 

[altaylar2000]

20 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Isn't your life more valuable than a stranger?

Depends on who is the stranger.

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

Do you also get to decide who is and is not evil?

Yes

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Have you ever taken antibiotics? 

Yes

Parasites do not belong to the innocent, on the contrary, they must be killed

Edited April 3, 2021 by altaylar2000

[dimreepr]

Just now, altaylar2000 said:

Depends on who is the stranger.

Someone you don't know anything about...

[altaylar2000]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Someone you don't know anything about...

then I don't know its price either

[dimreepr]

Just now, altaylar2000 said:

then I don't know its price either

But, you're happy to label a villain...

[iNow]

11 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Yes

Which means I also get to decide. I’ve decided you’re evil and that your life is worth less than a chicken. How will you defend against this?

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Parasites do not belong to the innocent, on the contrary, they must be killed

Parasites are innocent too, but you're happy to commit genocide; your moral compass needs adjusting, before you can find a route through the complexities of ethics... 😉 

[altaylar2000]

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Parasites are innocent too, but you're happy to commit genocide; your moral compass needs adjusting, before you can find a route through the complexities of ethics...

There is no difficulty for me. Predators and parasites(in animal world) are not conscious villains, but this is not a reason to equate them with the innocent. There is no such possibility to differentiate precisely conscious villainy, because anyone can be justified in this way, say the rapist is innocent, because nature created him that way. This is idle chatter

[dimreepr]

Just now, altaylar2000 said:

There is no difficulty for me. Predators and parasites(in animal world) are not conscious villains, but this is not a reason to equate them with the innocent. There is no such possibility to differentiate precisely conscious villainy, because anyone can be justified in this way, say the rapist is innocent, because nature created him that way. This is idle chatter

Have you ever been hungry enough to eat from a bin?

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

Predators and parasites(in animal world) are not conscious villains, but this is not a reason to equate them with the innocent. There is no such possibility to differentiate precisely conscious villainy

Now you’re moving goalposts by adding that your villain must be conscious. That’s fine, but now you must define what you mean by consciousness. I’m not hopeful you’ll succeed. 

3 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

anyone can be justified in this way, say the rapist is innocent, because nature created him that way. This is idle chatter

It’s not idle at all, especially when one considers more common usages of free will and how neuroscience undermines those usages. 

And again, you evade direct questions:

10 minutes ago, iNow said:

Which means I also get to decide. I’ve decided you’re evil and that your life is worth less than a chicken. How will you defend against this?

 

[altaylar2000]

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

Now you’re moving goalposts by adding that your villain must be conscious. That’s fine, but now you must define what you mean by consciousness. I’m not hopeful you’ll succeed. 

May be it's my problem with english, But there is

 

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

are not conscious villains, but this is not a reason to equate them with the innocent

 

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

Which means I also get to decide. I’ve decided you’re evil and that your life is worth less than a chicken. How will you defend against this?

In general, there are objective properties, this cannot be simply "decide"

Edited April 3, 2021 by altaylar2000

[iNow]

12 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

May be it's my problem with english, But there is

 

 

In general, there are objective properties, this cannot be simply "decide"

Right. Would you like to try now actually answering any questions asked of you?

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, altaylar2000 said:

May be it's my problem with english, But there is

14 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Have you ever been hungry enough to eat from a bin?

 

 

[altaylar2000]

Just now, iNow said:

Right. Would you like to try now actually answering any questions asked of you?

Just don't ask about the color of my underwear.

Just now, dimreepr said:

Have you ever been hungry enough to eat from a bin?

This is not an excuse, you can die from the cold, and there is no need to seek out extremes. Most people eat meat not even out of hunger, but for pleasure.