Hi Jim,
new voice here:
people seem to always forget that you also need 2.5 pounds of grain to feed
the 1/4 lb of meat causing another 10 death according to your mental
experiment (the factor of efficiency of vegetarian to meat diet is roughly
10:1). Personally, I think that eating organic is the most important goal in
an ethical sense, closely followed by a vegetarian or vegan diet because of
the huge amount of suffering and deaths pesticides inflict upon life on
earth.
Cheers
Volker
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Volker Bahn
Conservation Biologist
416-C E. Glenn Ave.
Auburn, AL
36830
USA
334-501-4881
[log in to unmask]
"I started by saying that one of the most fateful errors of our age is
the belief that the problem of
production has been solved. This illusion, I suggested, is mainly due
to our inability to recognise
that the modern industrial system, with all its intellectual
sophistication, consumes the very basis
on which it has been erected. To use the language of the economists,
it lives on irreplaceable capital
which it cheerfully treats as income. I specified three categories of
such capital: fossil fuels, the
tolerance margins of nature, and the human substance."
E.F. Schumacher
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Tantillo <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: March 6, 2000 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Re: Moral Significance, (formerly enviroethics, veget..)]
> Hi everyone,
>
> Speaking of nutty numbers, I ran across the following argument this
weekend
> while perusing the internet; just thought I'd try it out here. :-) This
> was posted to the alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian newsgroup:
>
> >
> >Eating a 1/4 lb of hamburger represents literally 1/2400 of an
> >animal death or less. Eating a 1/4 lb of grain could represent
> >1 animal death or more (we don't know). That 1/4 pound of beef
> >with 1/2400 of an animal replaces the 1 animal death from the
> >grain (and that assumes that the grain is providing the same
> >number of calories, which is not accurate).
> >
>
> Do folks here think these numbers stack up or not? In some ways, that's a
> serious question, too--I'd be interested to hear what people think.
>
> Jim T.
>
>
>
> >Chris wrote:
> >>Dear Jamey,
> >
> >>I would be interested in exploring this line of reasoning. I think it
>holds
> >promise. My guess is that there is no way of assigning the weights
> >>*objectively*. The best we can do is lay out our own subjective weights
>and
> >be prepared to defend them.
> >
> >>So what are my weights? I would think something like:
> >
> >>Chimp 0.1
> >>Cow 0.01
> >>Fish 0.0001
> >
> >>(all against human = 1).
> >
> >
> >Chris,
> >Yes, Chris, your numbers for the aforementioned animals are insultingly
low,
> >and no, I think that it is false that the numbers would be completely
> >subjective. The numbers are based on something very objective; the
ability to
> >suffer. Granted, maybe thier LIVES might not have an objective value. I
> >think you would agree that when a cruel experiment is performed on a
> >chimpanzee, that he/she does not suffer only 10% as much. He/she may
only
> >have 10% of the cerebral intellect you call human. It is entirely
possible
> >that the fish that you give .01% ethical weight, again can suffer likely
100%
> >as well as a human. Ecologically, some fish are literally a dime a
dozen, and
> >intellectually (such as the ability for abstract thought) maybe even .01%
is
> >high for a fish, but as someone who used to have them as companion
animals, I
> >can tell you that some fish are extremely intelligent and some very
emotional
> >and any biology student can tell you that they have an extremely complex
> >brain, completely able to suffer and feel many of the same emotions that
we
> >feel.
> >
> >Though we disagree on the numbers, still I agree with you 100% that if
people
> >would only grant the meager moral weights that you did, that this would
make
> >unjust vivisection, factory farming, killing for sport and many other
> >activities that are accepted casually in our modern day society. I
appreciate
> >your intelligent comments.
> >
> >Peace for All Beings
> >Jamey Lee West
> >
> >
> >____________________________________________________________________
> >Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|