What i mean to say with that is not that life (or eating meat) is immoral, but that the result of simply living is destruction to nature and other life is a normal part of the cyclus…
Its way more then just animals, its also the plants, the air you consume, the ant that happens to end under the leg of your chair…
The only way any being could ever to get a “neutral footprint” is to never get born to begin with.
I am perfectly happy with my meat consumption, but i do wish it was normal in my society to be more personally involved in what the natural costs is of what we have on our plates.
You lost me on assuming i don’t value consciousness but i read that you agree that is moral to live even knowing that doing so is an act of destruction?
I disagree that eating plants is destruction in any way that requires a moral valuation. Destroying a consciousness is morally problematic. But shuffling around nonconscious energy and matter into various states isn’t a moral issue.
I guess you can call eating plants “destroying” if you like. Just like I can say I murdered iron ore to forge it into a hammer. But both of those are just dramatic phrasing. if consciousness isn’t involved then morality isn’t either.
Its not just eating plants i am talking about but the grand total of destruction.
Every breath of air you take, every sip of water, every footprint in the dirt. It is impossible for any being, herbivorous or not to live with no ecological cost. Every fart is methane. Your housing takes space other life could claim. Your body blocks light to reach the moss spores behind you and your lungs convert oxygen to co2 as we speak.
My philosophy is to personally measure the cost where i am aware, lower it where i can but accept that there will always be a cost. Enjoy life regardless so that costs is not wasted.
Were speaking on completely spiritual different levels it seems. I am not religious but to me system of nature itself is a bigger consciousness with other life (like us) just sub parts of it, harming another being equals harming myself. Not wrong on itself but an important part of what makes life what it is.
The keyword is balance and awareness. Life requires destruction to persist and continue but to much destruction and it seizes to be also.
You’re doing your job. You breathe the air. That creates co2 for the plants to eat.
But let’s cut to the heart of it. What is the value of the ecology If not it’s ability to support consciousness? Do you think the universe, in all its chaos and meaningless motion, has some balance that has value?
So your gut tells you the killing part is a problem
A melancholic reality, the act of life is inherently destructive, not really a problem in a technical sense.
“I’ve tried literally nothing and there’s nothing left to try”
It’s not a reality, it’s a choice.
Trying to reach what goal?
“Life inherently is a destructive action”
What i mean to say with that is not that life (or eating meat) is immoral, but that the result of simply living is destruction to nature and other life is a normal part of the cyclus… Its way more then just animals, its also the plants, the air you consume, the ant that happens to end under the leg of your chair…
The only way any being could ever to get a “neutral footprint” is to never get born to begin with.
I am perfectly happy with my meat consumption, but i do wish it was normal in my society to be more personally involved in what the natural costs is of what we have on our plates.
Sure. If you assign a zero value to consciousness, what you say makes sense.
I, personally, value consciousness very highly. Call it bias, but I think consciousness is worth more than the sum of its parts.
You lost me on assuming i don’t value consciousness but i read that you agree that is moral to live even knowing that doing so is an act of destruction?
Then i think we are in agreement?
I disagree that eating plants is destruction in any way that requires a moral valuation. Destroying a consciousness is morally problematic. But shuffling around nonconscious energy and matter into various states isn’t a moral issue.
I guess you can call eating plants “destroying” if you like. Just like I can say I murdered iron ore to forge it into a hammer. But both of those are just dramatic phrasing. if consciousness isn’t involved then morality isn’t either.
Its not just eating plants i am talking about but the grand total of destruction.
Every breath of air you take, every sip of water, every footprint in the dirt. It is impossible for any being, herbivorous or not to live with no ecological cost. Every fart is methane. Your housing takes space other life could claim. Your body blocks light to reach the moss spores behind you and your lungs convert oxygen to co2 as we speak.
My philosophy is to personally measure the cost where i am aware, lower it where i can but accept that there will always be a cost. Enjoy life regardless so that costs is not wasted.
Were speaking on completely spiritual different levels it seems. I am not religious but to me system of nature itself is a bigger consciousness with other life (like us) just sub parts of it, harming another being equals harming myself. Not wrong on itself but an important part of what makes life what it is.
The keyword is balance and awareness. Life requires destruction to persist and continue but to much destruction and it seizes to be also.
You are part of that ecology and that’s ok.
You’re doing your job. You breathe the air. That creates co2 for the plants to eat.
But let’s cut to the heart of it. What is the value of the ecology If not it’s ability to support consciousness? Do you think the universe, in all its chaos and meaningless motion, has some balance that has value?