Is there really a strong argument you can make against Veganism?

[ZenAlex]

17 hours ago, aurum said:

@ZenAlex I’m an ex-vegan. It was a trash diet healthwise and did not work for me at all. Some people may be able to make it work with supplements if they’re very good about it, but I still wouldn’t recommend it. Going back to meat has been glorious.

Are you 100% sure it wasn't anything to do with your own decisions that made you feel this way?

Are you sure you were thoroughly in your attempts to meet your nutritional requirements?

[Schizophonia]

 

Quote

Moral relativism

If your morality is not inherently relative, then where does it come from? ? 

Quote

is exactly why vegans are able to ground their propositions on such a robust,

Robust, but based on absolutely nothing tangible, lol.

Quote

 ethical baseline. The same heuristic that applies to our fundamental code of conduct (don't kill/steal/rape - i.e reduce suffering) can be exteneded to include non-human animals as well.

And it is an error, human life has no value as one might understand, and to believe that the law is based on the "good" will of one population over another according to an ethical system is extremely naive and dangerous.

 

Quote

By saying "ethics is an abstract and realtive concept in your head" you are saying absolutely nothing by being technically right. I mean,

Quote

the nazis  thought they were doing their world a favor by killing all those jews.

You're saying yourself that nazis have killed jews in the name of "good", somewhere.

Quote

Now, even though there is no absolute ethical framework, would you not agree that killing all those innocent people was a terrible thing to do? Thought so.

No it's not a "terrible" thing, "terrible" is also a relative concept in your head.
The Nazis were not fought because they were "unethical", it was a response to their aggression, that's all.

It's a question of balance of power between différents libidinal forces. 

Quote

Millions of people lead healthy and happy lives under zero percent animal product consumption.

Quote

I was a semi-professional tennis player for years, eating an almost 100% vegan diet - and I felt great.

And ? that doesn't contradict what I've said. What statement I said contradicts this? Can you c+c c+v?

Btw, where are the vegetarian Olympic champions? If it is an optimal diet for performance it would have empirically been selected, wouldn't it?

Quote

Refering to ones intuition is fine with me, but thinking that "my intuition" is somewhat of a proxy of what other people should or should not eat  is a bit of a schizo-take. 
 

The real question is : Do you know a signifiant number of people whose intuition push them to consume several kilos of potatoes on a day ?

"Oh, i was so bored of eating all those parmesan, raw milk, fatty meat, oyster etcetc, fortunately, now i can finnaly enjoy my kilo of barley"

Lmao.

Quote

Because it's delicious.
Unhealthy food can be fucking delicious. 

You assume that your senses wish you harm.

Btw, while ago I would have admitted that instinct is unreliable in judging processed foods, but actually now I'm not so sure.
I do much better with butter croissants than with oats. (I dont only eat croissants lol).

 

Quote

If your definition of an "optimal" diet is one which doesn't require any form of supplementation, then yes - it's not not an "optimal" diet. 
If you want to talk about health outcomes, then a diet with high amounts of animal products is not "optimal". 

Beggining the question.

Vegetarianism made me aggressive, constipated (then gassy), with a certain brain fog.
I still remember when I was in high school at night and I was doubled over from what seemed like a colopathy attack.
And obviously the food was terrible.

When I tried the "ray peat" diet (almost carnivorous), I became very calm (too much?), productive, mentally clear, with perfect bowel movements.

By my own definition, this is optimal, not only because the empirical results are good, but because animal products lack NOTHING.

This has been the same experience for two friends of mine, and countless people I've seen on reddit.
All I received as an answer when asking vegan health professionals was to buy Gojy Man's training to exterminate my "bad intestinal flora" by ensuring that only a handful of bacteria that are weak in producing gas (nitrogen, hydrogen?) survives and develops lmao.

Quote

The need for supplementation is mainly a byproduct of our food-ecosystem and not the diet itself.

I can get as much EPA, DHA, D3, B12 etc as I want by eating animal products.
I know modern foods are depleted, but plants don't contain these nutrients at all.

Quote

A diet of purely white sugar + all supplements (macros + micros) will make you feel miserable and if you disagree with that, you need to take a basic course in physiology. 
 

I didn't say purely white sugar, I said "based on white sugar".
Of course you can't survive without enough protein and enough certain fats

Quote

Outside of certain oils, the vast majority of SFA-sources are animal based.

 

 

Only dairy products and possibly ruminant fat are particularly rich in saturated fats.

Quote

Lol. That's like saying that meat consumption is not natural because it makes you prone to overeating

Have you even tried the carnivore diet, or is it just a misanthropic implication, like the only way to eat enough to not be fat is to have a boring starch-based diet?
The meat is very satisfying.

Quote

- and that's why so many americans are fat. That's obviously a complete strawman and non-sequitor. 

No, Americans are fat because they eat a very processed and high-calorie mix diet, all without exercising. They are a degenerate people in this respect.
When you have a minimally demanding lifestyle and you're not metabolically ill, the question reverses and becomes "how to eat enough" lol.

Where I am, the men have a normal physique, even skinny, and are far from being vegan and having to stick to an unpleasant diet to stay that way.

 

Quote

Can you see what you are doing here?
You are taking the worst of the worst example from a study design perspective and therefore declare the whole field of epidemiology  as inadequate. Does that mean that randomized controlled trials are useless if I find you a shitty one? 

I didn't take "the worst example", I took "an example" to address the recurring problem of this type of study.

If you want to debunk the carnivorous works, go see Bart Kay, Anthony Chaffee etc. People who lingered there.

Quote

Look, there is good reason to shittalk epidemiology and I have done so multiple times in the past. 

Ditto.

Finally, we can talk about it directly, but we are starting to deviate.

Quote

However, the truth is that there are extremely well designed epi-studies out there. The art of the good and honest scientist is to find out which data is reliable and which is not. Some epi-studies are so well designed, that the data quality is even superior to some RCT's. Black and white thinking will lead you nowhere. I agree that those kind of studies are SOMETIMES used to serve a political or corporal agenda. However, its a logical fallacy to think that now ALL epi-studies are bad. That's just not the case....and if you really think that, you need to learn more about the subject.

I did not say that.

Quote

Do you even know what the science says about veganism? I doubt that. 

Science says nothing, it is not a monolithic entity.

Quote

I agree with you that some vegan groups use "SCIENCE®" to promote absurd health claims and fuel their propaganda pieces. I would include the Game Changer documentary, some of the ARTE stuff and Dr. Michael Greger/Neil Bernard in that category. 

 

Yes

Quote

But then to come out saying stuff like "linking veganism to science is false" is such a painfully stupid argument.

Why ? "the scientific community" is divided and the majority of nutritionists are opposed to veganism.

Quote

I mean we have an abundance of data looking at all the different diets under very controlled conditions. And the truth is that vegan diets, if done properly, can be extremely healthy.

Never said otherwise.

Quote

In terms of some hard outcomes it still get's outperformed by mediterranian patterns, but that's it, really.

Yes, which is not vegan.

Incidentally, what is the Mediterranean diet?

I know Spaniards and Israelis, in both cases it is probably fish/seafood, mutton/pork/poultry and white meats in general, wheat, some legumes, goat/sheep dairy products, vegetables and vegetable oils (olive, peanut, etc.)

Quote

There is also a reason why some food-socieities dont reccommend veganism to pregnant women or children - and that's very simple. Because people are usually very bad at adherence when it comes to restrictive diet patterns. 

 

Vegetarianism is not advised in case people don't follow it??
I think I didn't understand.

Quote

Ok, I have spent way too much time on this. 
Anyway, just wanted to clarify some stuff.

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

8 hours ago, toasty7718 said:

I wouldn't look down on someone for eating for eating an animal product if their body just can't go with plants, like Leo for example.
 

If our goal is to minimize suffering, then it should apply to the person also. 


There are people who have an easier time being with animal products than without them.

 

But it's also important to remember that many people who go onto a carnivore diet do so out of desperation, and so with an elimination diet their gut microbiome isn't in such a constant state of inflammation, so therefore they feel better in the short term. This is an issue that can be addressed by working with a functional medicine doctor or naturopathic doctor who is willing to incrementally uptake your fiber intake to get your microbiome used to fiber. The long term benefits outweigh the short term costs. 

 

Having a complete nutrient profile is also of concern, like EPA/DHA, certain amino acids, and vitamin b12 (among others).  

 

Aside from that, I don't see any ethical considerations that justify killing an animal without necessity for survival. 

But if someone just isn't ready to make the full transition to veganism or isn't in a place to because of their environment or health issues that stem from it, then I would say ethically source animal products to only the minimum degree that supports you and hold right to ethical lines you draw.
 

I would be more than happy if somebody struggling to go vegan just ate farm-fresh eggs from the farmer's market to get by yet refused to eat eggs from restaurants and their friend's house, or something along those lines.

 

This also means not automatically going to something like red meat, a kill product. If I do xyz then I automatically should do xyz because it's black & white is dangerous thinking. 

"Humane slaughter" is an oxymoron. Would you want to be at the other end of that? This brings in the pie slice theorem of ethics—imagine if you cut the pie and the other got to choose which slice they got. 
 

As humanity becomes more and more conscious, our circle of concern will grow. This is a hallmark of stage green thinking. As humanity progressed, the differences that the we saw in other sentient beings (like women, black people, other tribes, etc.) don't matter because they experience as much as we do and they have deserve negative rights.
 

Empathy is the progressive expanding of understanding that things that are seemingly different from us have so much more similarities with us than we can ever imagine. This circle of concern will eventually expand to all animals and eventually all sentient beings as humanity progresses their level of consciousness. 

There is no morality, ethics, and even less "evolution of consciousness", fortunately the slaves in the cotton fields did not wait for their masters to have such an "evolution" to rebel because otherwise they could have waited a long time.

It’s a self-limiting low-testosterone slave thought system. You don't even believe in hell, karma, or any deterrent system and yet you throw out your limiting concepts as if they were obvious and of worldly importance.
It's nonsense lol.

[aurum]

9 hours ago, ZenAlex said:

Are you 100% sure it wasn't anything to do with your own decisions that made you feel this way?

Yes, my decision to go vegan.

My point wasn’t that theoretically you couldn’t be optimally healthy and vegan. It’s possible that in the far distant future we will GMO perfect lab food and all be vegan.

But the reality for 99% people right now is that they will fail to do so. Even if they happen to be the minority that is extremely diligent. Optimal health is hard enough to achieve even when you do everything right, let alone when you handicap yourself with an inherently nutrient deficient diet like veganism.

[Princess Arabia]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

Yes, my decision to go vegan.

My point wasn’t that theoretically you couldn’t be optimally healthy and vegan. It’s possible that in the far distant future we will GMO perfect lab food and all be vegan.

But the reality for 99% people right now is that they will fail to do so. Even if they happen to be the minority that is extremely diligent. Optimal health is hard enough to achieve even when you do everything right, let alone when you handicap yourself with an inherently nutrient deficient diet like veganism.

You call GMO lab food vegan? What is perfect lab food? We don't call robots human, why would we call man-made chemicals food. 

[aurum]

22 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

You call GMO lab food vegan?

Correct. It is vegan strictly in the sense that it is not an animal-product.

If you have another definition of vegan, okay. But this is the most commonly used definition.

22 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

What is perfect lab food?

We don’t know exactly because it hasn’t been invented yet. But we can imagine that with sufficient research, humans will eventually synthesize something in a laboratory that is far superior for human health than anything we are eating now, including meat.

22 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

We don't call robots human, why would we call man-made chemicals food. 

That’s only because no one has GMO’d something well enough to be considered “food”. Yet.

It should be obvious that what we consider “food” is completely relative and not objective at all. When the day comes that a company lab grows something that is superior for your health than traditional food, we will start to consider it “food”. Or we just will discard the idea of food altogether.

[Princess Arabia]

41 minutes ago, aurum said:

Correct. It is vegan strictly in the sense that it is not an animal-product.

If you have another definition of vegan, okay. But this is the most commonly used definition.

We don’t know exactly because it hasn’t been invented yet. But we can imagine that with sufficient research, humans will eventually synthesize something in a laboratory that is far superior for human health than anything we are eating now, including meat.

That’s only because no one has GMO’d something well enough to be considered “food”. Yet.

It should be obvious that what we consider “food” is completely relative and not objective at all. When the day comes that a company lab grows something that is superior for your health than traditional food, we will start to consider it “food”. Or we just will discard the idea of food altogether.

Fair enough. Never looked at it that way. Probably never will, but I respect your stance on it. Never know, I might change my mind someday, because I've seen a man on YT that went without food for years. He's known as a breatharian. I've learnt to open my mind to infinite possibilities and to hear what people have to say without too much judgement Thanks for your response.

 

 

 

[toasty7718]

3 hours ago, aurum said:

alone when you handicap yourself with an inherently nutrient deficient diet like veganism.

Let me give you a choice.

 

Diet A covers all your base nutrients 

 

Diet B covers almost all nutrients but you need supplements. Intensive long term research says that this diet decreases your risk for auto immune diseases and makes you live longer.

 

Which diet would you choose?

[aurum]

30 minutes ago, toasty7718 said:

Diet B covers almost all nutrients but you need supplements. Intensive long term research says that this diet decreases your risk for auto immune diseases and makes you live longer.

Except that's not what the long term research says about veganism. Nor are you likely to get "almost all" your nutrients. So your binary choice is false.

[toasty7718]

20 hours ago, aurum said:

Except that's not what the long term research says about veganism

What evidence do you have for this claim dude? 

[toasty7718]

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24871675/
 

This is the Adventist health study 2, a prospective cohort study with a large sample pool that followed different dietary groups for long periods of time, including vegans 

"Non-vegetarian diets were compared to vegetarian dietary patterns (i.e., vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian) on selected health outcomes. Vegetarian diets confer protection against cardiovascular diseases, cardiometabolic risk factors, some cancers and total mortality. Compared to lacto-ovo-vegetarian diets, vegan diets seem to offer additional protection for obesity, hypertension, type-2 diabetes, and cardiovascular mortality"

[Applegarden8]

Don't make food a religion. Don't be bothered that something kills animals. Eat vegan because of it benefits, because they are there, look for them instead. Then you kinda miss what life is about and are angry at everyone that they are not doing what you are doing.

[vishnusavestheday]

All of these wise ones are coping because veganism makes one quite certain of their own beliefs. It screws your head on right. The dogma of simply leaving yourself out of harming animals requires too much transparency for many of these actualized folks. I can't say how many times I've picked myself out an actual bad trip by thinking "fuck that, fuck everything, at least I'm a fucking vegan." Oddly, I never get a sense that veganism plays into some larger scheme created to humanity's detriment.

 

Facts and logic destroy carnist nonsense every time. 
 

I had a time where I had these digestive stomach ulcers before I was certain of the diagnosis. I was shitting blood and I had been vegan at the time for many months. Everyone wanted to tell me, going on and on, that " I'm eating too much fiber in my diet; I should start eating animal products." That was certainly not the case as--after the colonoscopy and a couple tissue-samples later-- it was ruled as a stress-related ulcer. There are no medical recommendations to have anything less than a high fiber diet in lieu of such a medical observation. After a few enemas and oral mesalamines, I'm back to normal. Though I'm sure they may have been quite worried for me, I never ate animal products or caved into these silly people's suggestions. 

 

Goes to show that people don't know, and they often misinform out of ignorance rather than keep their mouth shut. If somebody were to have one shred of compassion for the injustice that happens to animals, then they went out on a limb for that point of view (ie went vegan) alone, that would be quite honorable.

 

If, after that point, they contracted some odd disease inexorably linked to following a plant-based diet, then went off to be martyred for it, this would be quite telling. It would be better than as some morally self-recusing parasite. So many ex-vegans quit the diet "for health reasons," then go off and buy the "pair of Ugg boots [they] always wanted."

 

It takes some faith and character to die with that dignity. What are else are we best for, other than the transfixion of the world's projections upon us?

 

Those last statements are probably a little too dangerous to take lightly: watch out for me, I guess...

 

I just can't imagine thinking-- say, if my father lived as some pig farmer--how quickly he'd slaughter some little piglet to see if it would make his vegan son's poopoo less red for dinner. Can we at least concede to this injustice rather than stare off at death with such vanity?

 

I'd even go as far to say that a vegan lifestyle is eons more important than any political belief or spiritual realization, because those affiliations lead to more polarizing division. It's frustrating that it's perceived as some "exclusively liberal" movement, because I oftentimes perceive similar interplay between veganism and natalism, which is oftentimes "exclusively conservative."

 

Veganism has a really good way of rooting out the intellectually honest ones from the crowd

[Carl-Richard]

Like @undeather said, I struggle mostly with the ethical arguments (i.e. veganism being superior). However, there is one thing to consider if you're a hyper-pragmatist: if you care about making a difference in the world, make it a part of your work. Not choosing to buy a pack of eggs is not going to stop factory farming, and not buying a pack of eggs will only make a nanoscopic difference in the total consumption of eggs on the Earth.

Although it can make you feel better that you're not at all complicit in a system you think is unjust (or you're that empathetic to animals), the real work is done when you put your ass to it: work in the relevant fields that further your message, become an activist, use your influence, etc.

Here you also have to factor in that animal welfare is not the only game in town for stopping unnecessary suffering. The meaning crisis is killing more people than you can possibly imagine, environmental problems and global warming will doom our species if left unchecked, political and social issues (local or global) need to be tended to, etc.

But of course, all this is just an excuse for avoiding the most ethical action, which is to not eat animals. If you're truly the most virtuous, empathetic and philosophically consistent person, you will not let the status quo dictate your actions at all. But countering the status quo does not come without costs, and it takes a certain person to fully commit to ethical sainthood (which will always be a failed project anyway).

I've been thinking lately though that I should become more empathetic in general, and that I'm perfectly capable of it, but again, that the status quo is not particularly supportive of it. And if I were to fully "open my heart", I don't think I could be a non-vegan, or watch the news. Maybe that can be a line of work in this direction: make people become more empathetic so they will do the right individual action.

Edited October 15, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Schizophonia]

On 11/10/2023 at 11:32 PM, toasty7718 said:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24871675/
 

This is the Adventist health study 2, a prospective cohort study with a large sample pool that followed different dietary groups for long periods of time, including vegans 

"Non-vegetarian diets were compared to vegetarian dietary patterns (i.e., vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian) on selected health outcomes. Vegetarian diets confer protection against cardiovascular diseases, cardiometabolic risk factors, some cancers and total mortality. Compared to lacto-ovo-vegetarian diets, vegan diets seem to offer additional protection for obesity, hypertension, type-2 diabetes, and cardiovascular mortality"

 

[Schizophonia]

On 14/10/2023 at 9:06 AM, vishnusavestheday said:

All of these wise ones are coping because veganism makes one quite certain of their own beliefs. It screws your head on right. The dogma of simply leaving yourself out of harming animals requires too much transparency for many of these actualized folks. I can't say how many times I've picked myself out an actual bad trip by thinking "fuck that, fuck everything, at least I'm a fucking vegan." Oddly, I never get a sense that veganism plays into some larger scheme created to humanity's detriment.

 

Facts and logic destroy carnist nonsense every time. 
 

I had a time where I had these digestive stomach ulcers before I was certain of the diagnosis. I was shitting blood and I had been vegan at the time for many months. Everyone wanted to tell me, going on and on, that " I'm eating too much fiber in my diet; I should start eating animal products." That was certainly not the case as--after the colonoscopy and a couple tissue-samples later-- it was ruled as a stress-related ulcer. There are no medical recommendations to have anything less than a high fiber diet in lieu of such a medical observation. After a few enemas and oral mesalamines, I'm back to normal. Though I'm sure they may have been quite worried for me, I never ate animal products or caved into these silly people's suggestions. 

 

Goes to show that people don't know, and they often misinform out of ignorance rather than keep their mouth shut. If somebody were to have one shred of compassion for the injustice that happens to animals, then they went out on a limb for that point of view (ie went vegan) alone, that would be quite honorable.

 

If, after that point, they contracted some odd disease inexorably linked to following a plant-based diet, then went off to be martyred for it, this would be quite telling. It would be better than as some morally self-recusing parasite. So many ex-vegans quit the diet "for health reasons," then go off and buy the "pair of Ugg boots [they] always wanted."

 

It takes some faith and character to die with that dignity. What are else are we best for, other than the transfixion of the world's projections upon us?

 

Those last statements are probably a little too dangerous to take lightly: watch out for me, I guess...

 

I just can't imagine thinking-- say, if my father lived as some pig farmer--how quickly he'd slaughter some little piglet to see if it would make his vegan son's poopoo less red for dinner. Can we at least concede to this injustice rather than stare off at death with such vanity?

 

I'd even go as far to say that a vegan lifestyle is eons more important than any political belief or spiritual realization, because those affiliations lead to more polarizing division. It's frustrating that it's perceived as some "exclusively liberal" movement, because I oftentimes perceive similar interplay between veganism and natalism, which is oftentimes "exclusively conservative."

 

Veganism has a really good way of rooting out the intellectually honest ones from the crowd

Lmao, ok.

And you are a humble person, full of common sense and emotional maturity, just like the member of this Olympic-level asshole enclave. of r/Vegan rddit.

[Schizophonia]

13 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Like @undeather said, I struggle mostly with the ethical arguments (i.e. veganism being superior). However, there is one thing to consider if you're a hyper-pragmatist: if you care about making a difference in the world, make it a part of your work. Not choosing to buy a pack of eggs is not going to stop factory farming, and not buying a pack of eggs will only make a nanoscopic difference in the total consumption of eggs on the Earth.

Although it can make you feel better that you're not at all complicit in a system you think is unjust (or you're that empathetic to animals), the real work is done when you put your ass to it: work in the relevant fields that further your message, become an activist, use your influence, etc.

Here you also have to factor in that animal welfare is not the only game in town for stopping unnecessary suffering. The meaning crisis is killing more people than you can possibly imagine, environmental problems and global warming will doom our species if left unchecked, political and social issues (local or global) need to be tended to, etc.

But of course, all this is just an excuse for avoiding the most ethical action, which is to not eat animals. If you're truly the most virtuous, empathetic and philosophically consistent person, you will not let the status quo dictate your actions at all. But countering the status quo does not come without costs, and it takes a certain person to fully commit to ethical sainthood (which will always be a failed project anyway).

I've been thinking lately though that I should become more empathetic in general, and that I'm perfectly capable of it, but again, that the status quo is not particularly supportive of it. And if I were to fully "open my heart", I don't think I could be a non-vegan, or watch the news. Maybe that can be a line of work in this direction: make people become more empathetic so they will do the right individual action.

Ethics and morality do not exist, they are irrational aberrations.
There is no reason to want "a fairer world" or "to be more empathetic", it doesn't even work anywhere except to protect your ego with magical thinking.
Everything you do by distilling these irrational ideas is in fact maximizing the possibilities for a very rational and cynical elite, even psychopathic/sociopathic.

The Marxist-Leninists understood this perfectly and this is largely why they criticized the principle of human rights, maintaining bourgeois power by keeping the people in the illusion that these arbitrary laws are somehow "universal" .

But you are weak modern Westerners incapable of killing and gutting an animal to eat it, the paradigm of the unjust jungle as ultimate reality scares you too much so you embrace a world of illusion ideal for your ego, even if it means becoming manipulable.
The height of mental slavery is when you're willing to let yourself die so you don't have to kill an animal to eat it if that's your only option (or even argue about it like it's not obvious) as I have already heard many times, sometimes even from fairly well-known vegan YouTubers (notably Vegan gains and That Vegans Teacher, as I remember)
These people should get a Darwin award, lol.

Edited October 15, 2023 by Schizophonia

[undeather]

53 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

Ethics and morality do not exist, they are irrational aberrations.
There is no reason to want "a fairer world" or "to be more empathetic", it doesn't even work anywhere except to protect your ego with magical thinking.
Everything you do by distilling these irrational ideas is in fact maximizing the possibilities for a very rational and cynical elite, even psychopathic/sociopathic.

The Marxist-Leninists understood this perfectly and this is largely why they criticized the principle of human rights, maintaining bourgeois power by keeping the people in the illusion that these arbitrary laws are somehow "universal" .

But you are weak modern Westerners incapable of killing and gutting an animal to eat it, the paradigm of the unjust jungle as ultimate reality scares you too much so you embrace a world of illusion ideal for your ego, even if it means becoming manipulable.
The height of mental slavery is when you're willing to let yourself die so you don't have to kill an animal to eat it if that's your only option (or even argue about it like it's not obvious) as I have already heard many times, sometimes even from fairly well-known vegan YouTubers (notably Vegan gains and That Vegans Teacher, as I remember)
These people should get a Darwin award, lol.

"Siri, give me an example of sophistry"

Edited October 15, 2023 by undeather

[zurew]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

Ethics and morality do not exist, they are irrational aberrations.
There is no reason to want "a fairer world" or "to be more empathetic", it doesn't even work anywhere except to protect your ego with magical thinking.
Everything you do by distilling these irrational ideas is in fact maximizing the possibilities for a very rational and cynical elite, even psychopathic/sociopathic.

The Marxist-Leninists understood this perfectly and this is largely why they criticized the principle of human rights, maintaining bourgeois power by keeping the people in the illusion that these arbitrary laws are somehow "universal" .

But you are weak modern Westerners incapable of killing and gutting an animal to eat it, the paradigm of the unjust jungle as ultimate reality scares you too much so you embrace a world of illusion ideal for your ego, even if it means becoming manipulable.
The height of mental slavery is when you're willing to let yourself die so you don't have to kill an animal to eat it if that's your only option (or even argue about it like it's not obvious) as I have already heard many times, sometimes even from fairly well-known vegan YouTubers (notably Vegan gains and That Vegans Teacher, as I remember)
These people should get a Darwin award, lol.

Lot of confidence , lot of smugness , but is there any substance? lets test it!

From that wall of text it seems to me you don't know what morality is. So what do you think morality is and then answer this: what is irrational about morality?

[Schizophonia]

58 minutes ago, zurew said:

Lot of confidence , lot of smugness , but is there any substance? lets test it!

From that wall of text it seems to me you don't know what morality is

No actually, is it a manual that can be found at Fnac? lol.

58 minutes ago, zurew said:

. So what do you think morality is and then answer this: what is irrational about morality?

It is about limiting one's possible field of action according to arbitrary laws, and in a "disinterested" manner (in a theological paradigm, not fishing in the hope of going to paradise is intelligent, pragmatic, but it is no longer a question of being "moral").
In other words, obey without flinching the law of a system that has been put in your head even though you do not believe in any form of punishment.
 

There is absolutely no reason to deprive yourself of killing an animal to eat it (among other things, but here the subject is veganism) if you do not believe in divine punishment.
Deprive yourself of killing an animal by removing the notions of "moral", "ethics", "justification" or "excuse" when you are an atheist and/or are not convinced of any kind of punishment is the stupidest/irrational thing you can do.

I've already said it 50 times but no one can answer me, at least without the response being a quick ad hominem, or simply drowning the point by paraphrasing what has already been said by multiplying useless concepts and providing an answer. more complicated/boring.
Of course there is no possible reason, because I am only explaining very simple and tangible observations and resonances.