How do you Justify consuming Animal Products?

[Scholar]

@Keyhole

Ask yourself this:

I made multiple claims about spiral dynamics, about identity, about how society evolves and so forth and so forth. Why are you not challenging me on a single one of those claims? Why are you sifting through posts I made months ago to prove to me, or yourself, that I am being unconscious and dogmatic?

Seriously, ask yourself why you are doing this. The only thing of substance you posted was about persuation tactics, which was a video that I feel like compeltely misses spiral dynamics and how persuation works differently in the context of actual Value evolution. We can gladly discuss that, even though the rest of the points I made about Identity, Values vs Views and Real Self-Authentic Self-False Self I think were far more important.

That's where we can have a valuable discussion. Rather you have this weird obsession with whether or not I am conscious or developed or not and how I should focus on self-improvement and conduct. This is what I mean with the pseudo-spirituality. It is used as a defense. As soon as people here feel like they don't want to contend with something, they dismiss everything by calling the person delusional, underdeveloped or unconscious.

 

I know why I am defending veganism here. I know I have identity attachments to other living creatures much like to my family. Now, ask yourself, why exactly are you here? Why exactly are you responding to me and attempting to show me my unconsciousness? Why are you posting videos that make fun of vegan bacon?

That suddenly has nothing to do with egoic attachment, bad conduct or dogma? You honestly think you are free from that?

[Scholar]

I would like to hear a Moderator give their opinion on this, what is happening here between Keyhole and me and in this Thread in general. I don't feel like I am self-deluding myself in the way Keyhole is describing, to me it seems like a very uncharitable interpretation of what I am saying and what is actually going on. I felt at no point like he was attempting to understand or inquire into my position. And I also felt like he was not really contending with my points.

 

But I am willing to listen to a third perspective.

 

[karltiboleng]

@Scholar Please, take a step back and read your posts carefully. Turning inwards leads to the most growth

[Scholar]

6 minutes ago, karltiboleng said:

@Scholar Please, take a step back and read your posts carefully. Turning inwards leads to the most growth

I have, I still do not agree with Keyhole's understanding. Can you help me and point out specifically what I need to look at?

[karltiboleng]

I will attempt once more to get through to you - you cannot force ideologies unto others. This is the problem with religion, feminism, the war on terrorism, the war on drugs, any form of identity politics in general. It it a valiant effort that you've gone vegan, I really respect that. But this is something that people will have to come to realise on their own. Proselytizing just leads to backlash and hate. It is true, no doubt, that many people try to justify their laziness by citing half baked claims about the pitfalls of veganism. But let them be. 

Debates can be healthy but you're definitely doing it in an unhealthy manner. Especially posting cartoons that ridicule people who don't agree with you, now that's just silly. Really consider opposing viewpoints and try to understand where they come from. 

 

[Scholar]

Just now, karltiboleng said:

I will attempt once more to get through to you - you cannot force ideologies unto others. This is the problem with religion, feminism, the war on terrorism, the war on drugs, any form of identity politics in general. It it a valiant effort that you've gone vegan, I really respect that. But this is something that people will have to come to realise on their own. Proselytizing just leads to backlash and hate. It is true, no doubt, that many people try to justify their laziness by citing half baked claims about the pitfalls of veganism. But let them be. 

Debates can be healthy but you're definitely doing it in an unhealthy manner. Especially posting cartoons that ridicule people who don't agree with you, now that's just silly. Really consider opposing viewpoints and try to understand where they come from. 

 

I am not trying to force ideologies, I am pointing to systemic issues in how people in here understanding spiral dynamics and identity evolution.

And I don't agree that the cartoons are silly, I think they are very good at what they are doing, I already tried to explain why I thought that was the case.

 

You are telling me to really consider opposing viewpoints and try to understand them, but you do not apply this to me. What about my viewpoints about why I think these cartoons are effective? What about my viewpoints about Identity, Values vs Views and the three Self distinction? Why are you not open minded to that and trying to understand where I am coming from?

You are just making assertions that you are correct. When I tried to explain and justify my position I gave all sorts of arguments for why it is the case (namely what I said about Identity, Values vs Views and the Three Selfs). Yet, you just ignore that and call me ignorant for having posted innocent cartoons. Is it my identity that makes me post cartoons, or is it your identity that feels threatened by these cartoons and lashes out by calling them ineffective advocacy?

How do you know these cartoons are ineffective? I had great experiences convincing people like this. As I said repeatedly, my goal is not to change your values, I don't think that is possible. One goal was to clear up the misunderstanding of spirituality and identity evolution I see in this community, and another goal is to make people with green values realize the importance of a firm green viewpoint. I see a lot of toxic relativism and spiritual shaming in here that is used to justify lower value sets and identities.

This is my view, and I have not seen any compelling arguments from you that challenge that view.

 

I would like to have a moderator give their opinion on this.

[Forestluv]

3 hours ago, tenta said:

I'll just let your group go vegan and I won't because you didn't prove one person makes a difference by going vegan, which is what vegans are arguing for

During my journey, I've contemplated many different rationales for meat eating, including this one. Yet this argument is super weak to me and doesn't even pass basic logic.

Rather than concentrate on what others are doing, I ask myself "what type of person do I want to be? What are my values and how can I behave according to my values?". If other people are behaving in a way I think is unethical, I will not participate. 

As an analogy: I notice a group of men torturing dogs in a park. I have three options:

1) I try to stop the men from torturing the dogs.

2) I do nothing and walk away.

3) I join the men and start torturing the dogs.

My personal value would be that it is unethical to torture dogs. At a minimum, I will not participate in the torture. I would not think "I can't stop the men from torturing the dogs. The dogs will be tortured whatever I do. I might as well grab a bat and start beating the dogs". . . To me, this makes no sense. I would be clear about my own personal values and take responsibility for my behavior. For me, torturing a dog is unethical and I won't participate in it, regardless of what others are doing. Having personal values and holding oneself accountable to those personal values is a sign of integrity. . . If I say "It is unethical to torture dogs" and then I join in the torturing of dogs - that would be a lack of personal integrity. 

I don't eat meat, yet I do eat animal products on occasion (cheese and yogurt). Thus, I am participating in animal cruelty. Yet rather than rationalize this away, I acknowledge my impact and take responsibility. I don't create bizarre thought stories to avoid taking responsibility for my participation in animal cruelty. Doing so would prevent me from expanding my empathy and love for other organisms. For me to expand my empathy and love, I need to be clear about what my edge of empathy and love is and grow beyond this edge. If I put my head in the sand with rationalizations, I will not grow and expand. 

[Roy]

3 hours ago, Scholar said:

But I am willing to listen to a third perspective.

Here is a third perspective; Stop being an obscurantist troll. Stop posting walls of text that don't specifically address anything and just serve as a way for you vent your frustrations instead of discussing (which is the purpose of a forum).

Stop making egregious and inapplicable analogies about the holocaust and slavery, and then implying that people who don't think like you are racist or bigoted or supportive of these things.

Meet people where they are at and in context and everything will simply go a lot smoother.

Edited March 10, 2020 by Roy

[tenta]

@Serotoninluv

Being vegan on an individual level while acknowledging you aren't changing supply and demand (like I've said) doesn't pass as logic, so comparing it to joining them is a bad analogy

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

I don't eat meat, yet I do eat animal products on occasion (cheese and yogurt). Thus, I am participating in animal cruelty. Yet rather than rationalize this away, I acknowledge my impact and take responsibility. I don't create bizarre thought stories to avoid taking responsibility for my participation in animal cruelty. Doing so would prevent me from expanding my empathy and love for other organisms. For me to expand my empathy and love, I need to be clear about what my edge of empathy and love is and grow beyond this edge. If I put my head in the sand with rationalizations, I will not grow and expand. 

I just don't believe people are taking part in the bad aspects of the meat industry by buying the finished product, it isn't saying that you agree with everything the meat industry is doing

And I agree, if everyone went vegan then it would be a good solution, but the argument vegans are proposing is that you as an individual should go vegan or else you're immoral or inconsistent, which I don't agree with

[Scholar]

12 minutes ago, Roy said:

Meet people where they are at and in context and everything will simply go a lot smoother.

Prefaced with this.

12 minutes ago, Roy said:

Here is a third perspective; Stop being an obscurantist troll.

 

This cognitive dissonance is beyond me.

[tenta]

Just now, Scholar said:

Prefaced with this.

 

This cognitive dissonance is beyond me.

No, that just means he believes he's meeting you at your level while also pointing out to you that your memes aren't going to persuade anyone and were made by vegans who don't want to look at the other side's perspective

[Scholar]

5 minutes ago, tenta said:

No, that just means he believes he's meeting you at your level while also pointing out to you that your memes aren't going to persuade anyone and were made by vegans who don't want to look at the other side's perspective

And if he read any of my posts he would know that the Meme's purpose is not to persuade carnists or change their perspective.

Ah, it's the vegans who are not looking at the other side's perspective... yes, it's not the carnists who are turning a blind eye towards the suffering of the animals they pay to be enslaved and slaughtered. The vegans are the ignorant ones, they need to understand the carnists! Of course, thank you for that valuable insights. I will now go and criticize the vegans who are so ignorant and dogmatic for trying to create a culture that is concerned with the suffering of sentient beings.

Man, I wish I could travel back in time to tell all of the abolitionists that they should be more compassionate and understanding towards the slavors. That surely would have made all the difference.

[Forestluv]

35 minutes ago, tenta said:

@Serotoninluv

I just don't believe people are taking part in the bad aspects of the meat industry by buying the finished product

This is a way for a mind to distance itself from acknowledging and taking responsibility for participating within harm dynamics.

I’ve used the same arguments you are using back when I was unable to see my relationship and impact within inter-connected networks. You don't seem interested or willing to introspect this at this time. 

The original thread question was about how one justifies their participation within harm dynamics and I think you are giving great examples of such justifications. 

[tenta]

5 minutes ago, Scholar said:

And if he read any of my posts he would know that the Meme's purpose is not to persuade carnists or change their perspective.

Ah, it's the vegans who are not looking at the other side's perspective... yes, it's not the carnists who are turning a blind eye towards the suffering of the animals they pay to be enslaved and slaughtered. The vegans are the ignorant ones, they need to understand the carnists! Of course, thank you for that valuable insights. I will now go and criticize the vegans who are so ignorant and dogmatic for trying to create a culture that is concerned with the suffering of sentient beings.

Man, I wish I could travel back in time to tell all of the abolitionists that they should be more compassionate and understanding towards the slavors. That surely would have made all the difference.

The """carnists""" (that's not an ideology, you're the one going out of your way to be vegan) are buying a finished product, like I said, you going vegan isn't impacting a store's supply

Lab meat, better capitalism etc. would be better ways to stop the "evil" so you're not just trying to create a culture that is concerned with more suffering, you're also posting stupid memes to portray those who aren't going vegan (the method you are suggesting) as being inconsistent or immoral which isn't true

Slavery is a slave mastery directly engaging in cruelty, they weren't having discussions, and since eating meat won't be abolished like slavery was isn't looking at the other side's perspective better?

[Roy]

21 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Man, I wish I could travel back in time to tell all of the abolitionists that they should be more compassionate and understanding towards the slavors. That surely would have made all the difference.

This is exactly the kind of stuff that prevents people from seriously engaging with you.

Consider you might need to shoot your psychoanalysis gun in the mirror instead of at everyone else.

Edited March 10, 2020 by Roy

[tenta]

11 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

This is a way for a mind to distance itself from acknowledging and taking responsibility for participating within harm dynamics.

I’ve used the same arguments you are using back when I was unable to see my relationship and impact within inter-connected networks. You don't seem interested or willing to introspect this at this time. 

No because I do realize if lots of people went vegan then it would make a difference, but you didn't prove how one person not going vegan is cruel

Edited March 10, 2020 by tenta

[Roy]

4 minutes ago, tenta said:

No because I do realize if lots of people went vegan then it would make a difference, but you didn't prove how one person not going vegan is participating in the cruelty

I think the argument is just simple math friend. It's the same reason why one person choosing to drive less means there is less carbon being put in the air.

One person does make a difference. In the grand scheme of things the number is small but it's still a number none-the-less.

The only question is how much do you want to participate in contributing to the problem or solving it. That's your decision obviously.

Edited March 10, 2020 by Roy

[Scholar]

1 minute ago, Roy said:

This is exactly the kind of stuff that prevents people from seriously engaging with you.

Consider you might need to shoot your psychoanalysis gun in the mirror instead of at everyone else.

I am not interested in engaging with you about carnism, I have done so many times in a multitude of ways. Everything I wrote is geared towards people who are susceptible towards what I am writing. I would rather help some stage greens solidify their understanding of identity, three self's, values vs views etc. than attempt in futility to heave orange up to green. Even if I convinced you of a new View, it would change nothing about your Values. See my posts about Identity, Views vs Values etc.

3 minutes ago, tenta said:

The """carnists""" (that's not an ideology, you're the one going out of your way to be vegan) are buying a finished product, like I said, you going vegan isn't impacting a store's supply

This contradicts the most basic understanding of supply and demand.

 

Okay guys, I am calling it. At this point we are just poking each others identities and I don't see value in it anymore. I will only respond to moderators if they wish to add something to this.

[tenta]

1 minute ago, Scholar said:

I am not interested in engaging with you about carnism, I have done so many times in a multitude of ways. Everything I wrote is geared towards people who are susceptible towards what I am writing. I would rather help some stage greens solidify their understanding of identity, three self's, values vs views etc. than attempt in futility to heave orange up to green. Even if I convinced you of a new View, it would change nothing about your Values. See my posts about Identity, Views vs Values etc.

This contradicts the most basic understanding of supply and demand.

 

Okay guys, I am calling it. At this point we are just poking each others identities and I don't see value in it anymore. I will only respond to moderators if they wish to add something to this.

A store chooses how much to order, and you buying will not change that.

[Forestluv]

12 minutes ago, tenta said:

No because I do realize if lots of people went vegan then it would make a difference, but you didn't prove how one person not going vegan is participating in the cruelty

Engaging in these thoughts stories, debates and demanding “proof” against one’s view is a distraction. It protects one’s attachment and identity.

The question you need to ask is if you want to expand your capacity for empathy and love. If you answer “yes”, you will need to surrender and let go of some beliefs to allow this expansion. This will be uncomfortable at times. If you answer “no” then you will stay within a contraction and continue to debate and argue with others to protect and maintain that contracted belief construct.  

If I enter your contracted realm of debate, it will only serve to re-enforce that contraction. This would be counter-productive to the evolution of consciousness. You are showing no signs of curiosity, openness or willingness to expand.