2

votes

What are some ethical arguments for paleo?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created March 10, 2011 at 7:55 PM

There are people who want to argue our diet on ethical grounds rather than just health grounds. How do we respond?

C1ea79115a062250a7263764797faa30

(851)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

There are plenty of people in the world who are sociopaths and very few of them are in any position to actually ever harm you. The term is more properly descriptive of a mindset or behavior - sociopaths are individuals who think of/treat everyone else as having no inherent value beyond their utility to the individual in question. The difference is that your boundary beyond which nothing has any inherent value is drawn around the entire human species, not you as an individual; but it's the same mindset and the same behavior.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 14, 2011
at 01:42 AM

The circumstance that moral agency enables one to be an ally and to advocate the liberty of another agent. When a person is mentally retarded, we afford them considerations so that others will afford us considerations if we are in their shoes. So humans in all cases just happen to be of value. Either way I fail to see how your position is a criticism of mine. You're basically just asserting that we ought to care about animals because because because or else we're X name. That is lazy philosophy.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 14, 2011
at 01:40 AM

Oh noes I have been labeled! Isn't it a bit inane to try to slap a meaningless label on a person in place of philosophy? What in the world is "inherent value beyond their utility. Others are valuable to us for many reasons, and if we can't enumerate the reasons then what business do we have in saying that they are valuable? The value in itself? What is that? If someone is valuable is it valuable to someone for some reasons. This is just abstract nonsense. It happens to be that all humans are always of value to all other humans. It isn't an absolute or "inherent", but is born of circumstance.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 13, 2011
at 08:17 PM

"Sociopath" is a word we use to describe people who are harmful to us. Is the exploitation of animals harmful to us? Of course not. They are not moral agents, but we are. Human psychology makes a poignant distinction between the human and the non human for obvious reasons of moral agency and relevance.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 13, 2011
at 08:11 PM

The problem with the marginal human argument is that it is always conducive to my liberty to defend the liberty of the marginal. If I am ever in a situation where I am mentally retarded then I will want considerations made for me, thus I should advocate considerations for the mentally retarded and foster a society that takes care of these people. I can't believe that this objection comes up so much. Don't people see how oppressing the retarded, children, blacks and women undermine their security? Everyone able to advocate my liberty is a valuable ally and invaluable. Animals don't fit the bill

C1ea79115a062250a7263764797faa30

(851)

on March 13, 2011
at 08:03 PM

The second (more important) issue I would take with your response is that the idea "the fallacious argument that X ought to be considered valuable beyond what they are good for to us" is essentially the reasoning of a sociopath, as becomes more clear if you replace X with "women" or "negroes" rather than "animals". It's not sociopathy per se, but it is analogous behavior that I think can justifiably be called "speciopathic". It's also in clear direct opposition to some Native American ideology that has survived and been ecologically beneficial on the whole.

C1ea79115a062250a7263764797faa30

(851)

on March 13, 2011
at 07:50 PM

People routinely address issues of ethics regarding other humans who cannot (or who are considered to be unable to) fulfill the requirements you set out for morality in your second sentence. Age of consent laws, child support laws, child labor laws, euthanasia, and treatment of the mentally impaired are some examples of interactions which are or can be beyond reciprocal mutual agreement between reasonable moral agents.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

(3641)

on March 11, 2011
at 04:28 PM

lame, not sure why they would. perhaps they were vegan

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 11, 2011
at 05:43 AM

Hmm, someone rated this down. I don't think that it is a bad post in the sense that it is destructive to the forum flow. I said "justify yourselves", not de-rep Stabby from obscurity.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on March 11, 2011
at 12:45 AM

several ethical arguments wer covered in a previous post paleohacks.com/questions/10840/…

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on March 11, 2011
at 12:45 AM

several ethical arguments wer covered in a previous post http://paleohacks.com/questions/10840/what-are-the-smartest-anti-paleo-arguments-and-our-responses-to-them#axzz1GFJceNbr

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

(3641)

on March 10, 2011
at 10:30 PM

perhaps we should form a paleo youth brigade to save the children from the vegan menace.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 10, 2011
at 09:04 PM

Worse is lying about science (or being careless with one's skepticism) to the detriment of young, naive kiddies.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

(3641)

on March 10, 2011
at 08:30 PM

"Will you have me decrease the vitality of my organism for the sake of your ideology?" - ++

  • 691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

    asked by

    (3641)
  • Views
    2.7K
  • Last Activity
    1553D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

7 Answers

4
186b8011a1572ec5b3ac68f5a7a72d2d

on March 10, 2011
at 08:25 PM

A simple response to the animal rights argument is that, although Paleo is obviously not as pleasing to an animal rights extremist as veganism or vegetarianism, it is still far more animal-friendly than SAD. Paleo tends to advocate organic, free-range and grass-fed meat - from animals who've lived mostly the way nature intended - rather than industrially farmed animals kept in cramped, cruel conditions and fed the cheapest food possible that'll fatten them up (corn and chemicals).

As with anything, viewing food ethics in terms of solely "good" or "bad" is inaccurate and unhelpful - it's a spectrum, and I think Paleo's definitely nearer one end than the other.

3
Medium avatar

on March 10, 2011
at 08:58 PM

I think suicide through poor diet is unethical.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

(3641)

on March 10, 2011
at 10:30 PM

perhaps we should form a paleo youth brigade to save the children from the vegan menace.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 10, 2011
at 09:04 PM

Worse is lying about science (or being careless with one's skepticism) to the detriment of young, naive kiddies.

3
Ce0b5fd94b1034e96cf710b6f138c29d

on March 10, 2011
at 08:34 PM

The sustainability argument is nothing to do with Paleo; it's really a tacit admission that we're in population overshoot and exceeding the planet's carrying capacity.

2
64242a1130eb51f4852f78beed38b3d5

(1343)

on March 10, 2011
at 08:11 PM

The biggest is sustainability from an environmental point of view. The purchase of locally grown fruits and veg is a win win for everybody. Probably a bigger win if you source your meat locally.

2
Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 10, 2011
at 08:07 PM

Which ethical issues? If eating animals, then I should point them to the fact that morality is a mutual agreement between moral agents who can advocate the liberty of each other, reciprocate, and whose behaviors are amendable by reason. No human's life was ever made more free by affording animals rights. There is something to say to people who malevolently torture animals, but there is a difference between love of causing pain and indifference to pain for pragmatic purposes. I dislike how so many people give in to the fallacious argument that animals ought to be considered valuable beyond what they are good for to us. My question to them: wherein lies the justification for your indignation and moralizing? Justify yourselves.

If "omg meat is just sooooo bad for the environment", I will leave the truth of the matter to Melissa but I should say that having children is much much worse, but it is reprehensible to wag your fingers at newlyweds with a baby boy. Sometimes we make concessions for people who feel that their lives are enriched by a certain behavior. Reproduction and dietary habits are amongst the most intimate and thus, untouchable unless you want to be a douche. Especially if there is good evidence that eating -some- meat is healthier than eating none. Will you have me decrease the vitality of my organism for the sake of your ideology? Justify yourselves.

I should also note that the city buses run on beef tallow. That is such a waste. I eat all my beef tallow and only enough of the protein to meet my basic requirements. But really we need Mellisa's take. I know little of these things.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

(3641)

on March 10, 2011
at 08:30 PM

"Will you have me decrease the vitality of my organism for the sake of your ideology?" - ++

C1ea79115a062250a7263764797faa30

(851)

on March 13, 2011
at 08:03 PM

The second (more important) issue I would take with your response is that the idea "the fallacious argument that X ought to be considered valuable beyond what they are good for to us" is essentially the reasoning of a sociopath, as becomes more clear if you replace X with "women" or "negroes" rather than "animals". It's not sociopathy per se, but it is analogous behavior that I think can justifiably be called "speciopathic". It's also in clear direct opposition to some Native American ideology that has survived and been ecologically beneficial on the whole.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 14, 2011
at 01:42 AM

The circumstance that moral agency enables one to be an ally and to advocate the liberty of another agent. When a person is mentally retarded, we afford them considerations so that others will afford us considerations if we are in their shoes. So humans in all cases just happen to be of value. Either way I fail to see how your position is a criticism of mine. You're basically just asserting that we ought to care about animals because because because or else we're X name. That is lazy philosophy.

C1ea79115a062250a7263764797faa30

(851)

on March 13, 2011
at 07:50 PM

People routinely address issues of ethics regarding other humans who cannot (or who are considered to be unable to) fulfill the requirements you set out for morality in your second sentence. Age of consent laws, child support laws, child labor laws, euthanasia, and treatment of the mentally impaired are some examples of interactions which are or can be beyond reciprocal mutual agreement between reasonable moral agents.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 11, 2011
at 05:43 AM

Hmm, someone rated this down. I don't think that it is a bad post in the sense that it is destructive to the forum flow. I said "justify yourselves", not de-rep Stabby from obscurity.

691f120a3e7a1a036845d105d86c99a3

(3641)

on March 11, 2011
at 04:28 PM

lame, not sure why they would. perhaps they were vegan

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 13, 2011
at 08:17 PM

"Sociopath" is a word we use to describe people who are harmful to us. Is the exploitation of animals harmful to us? Of course not. They are not moral agents, but we are. Human psychology makes a poignant distinction between the human and the non human for obvious reasons of moral agency and relevance.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 13, 2011
at 08:11 PM

The problem with the marginal human argument is that it is always conducive to my liberty to defend the liberty of the marginal. If I am ever in a situation where I am mentally retarded then I will want considerations made for me, thus I should advocate considerations for the mentally retarded and foster a society that takes care of these people. I can't believe that this objection comes up so much. Don't people see how oppressing the retarded, children, blacks and women undermine their security? Everyone able to advocate my liberty is a valuable ally and invaluable. Animals don't fit the bill

C1ea79115a062250a7263764797faa30

(851)

on September 07, 2013
at 01:28 AM

There are plenty of people in the world who are sociopaths and very few of them are in any position to actually ever harm you. The term is more properly descriptive of a mindset or behavior - sociopaths are individuals who think of/treat everyone else as having no inherent value beyond their utility to the individual in question. The difference is that your boundary beyond which nothing has any inherent value is drawn around the entire human species, not you as an individual; but it's the same mindset and the same behavior.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on March 14, 2011
at 01:40 AM

Oh noes I have been labeled! Isn't it a bit inane to try to slap a meaningless label on a person in place of philosophy? What in the world is "inherent value beyond their utility. Others are valuable to us for many reasons, and if we can't enumerate the reasons then what business do we have in saying that they are valuable? The value in itself? What is that? If someone is valuable is it valuable to someone for some reasons. This is just abstract nonsense. It happens to be that all humans are always of value to all other humans. It isn't an absolute or "inherent", but is born of circumstance.

1
C61399790c6531a0af344ab0c40048f1

on March 12, 2011
at 04:44 PM

My 20 year old niece has just gone vegan. At the moment I'm keeping my mouth shut - I think any kind of lecture will be counter-productive. I might lend her mum The Vegetarian Myth by Lierre Keith though and hope she leaves it lying around.

1
1acc4ee9381d9a8d998b59915b3f997e

(2099)

on March 10, 2011
at 08:10 PM

How do I respond? I don't...unless I'm in the mood to hear myself talk.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!