vicarious moral responsibility
On 3/8/2012 9:39 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On Mar 8, 5:47 pm, George > wrote:
>> On 3/8/2012 8:18 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 8, 4:53 pm, George > wrote:
>>>> On 3/8/2012 12:48 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Mar 7, 9:32 pm, George > wrote:
>>>>>> "glen" or "mark" or "little cocksucker" - the friend of Lesley Simon,
>>>>>> the Whore of Ballaghaderreen, County Roscommon - has it. He shares
>>>>>> moral responsibility for the animal CDs caused in order to put food on
>>>>>> his plate. This cannot be rationally disputed.
>>
>>>>>> His relationship with the hands-on killers of animals has these elements:
>>
>>>>>> * the relationship is voluntary - no coercion applied to the principal
>>
>>>>>> * the principal is an active participant, i.e., actively engages in
>>>>>> the relationship such as, for example, going to the grocery
>>
>>>>>> * the principal is fully aware of the agent's actions
>>
>>>>>> * the relationship is not instrumentally necessary for the principal to
>>>>>> achieve a legitimate goal, e.g. the acquisition of food
>>
>>>>> If I am to remain employed at the University of Münster, I do need to
>>>>> buy the products of commercial agriculture in order to obtain food.
>>
>>>> So? There is no need to remain so employed; that's a *want* that you have.
>>
>>>>> I really don't think there's any way around that. So presumably you
>>>>> would claim that remaining employed at the University of Münster is
>>>>> not a "legitimate goal".
>>
>>>> You are making a choice. You must bear all moral responsibility for the
>>>> consequences of your choice.
>>
>>>> You keep losing sight of the fact that I am not telling you to cause
>>>> zero animal deaths or harm. I'm instructing you to stop making the
>>>> false conclusion you make about the meaning of not putting animal bits
>>>> in your mouth. You are not following a "cruelty free" diet, and you are
>>>> not "minimizing" the harm you cause. You must admit that your
>>>> conclusion about your moral position due to adhering to the false belief
>>>> system of "veganism" is false.
>>
>>> No, I'm not following a cruelty free diet, and I'm not doing literally
>>> everything that is within my power short of suicide to minimise the
>>> harm that I cause
>>
>> Therefore, being "vegan" achieves nothing ethically required.
>
> That obviously does not follow.
It does.
|