On Apr 8, 5:20*pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> On 4/7/2012 11:29 PM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 6:03 pm, George > *wrote:
> >> On 4/7/2012 1:33 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 6, 10:44 pm, > * *wrote:
> >>>> > * *wrote
>
> >>>>> What do you suppose would motivate the search if they didn't believe
> >>>>> (falsely) that it was the best way of trying to reduce harm to
> >>>>> animals? How would you make sense of what they are doing if they
> >>>>> didn't have that belief?
>
> >>>> They believe that by being vegan they achieve a certain moral standing and
> >>>> by consuming any animal parts at all they are tainted and that moral
> >>>> standing is threatened. They perceive it as the idea being "repulsive" or
> >>>> something to that effect.
>
> >>> How would they be able to sustain the belief that they thereby obtain
> >>> a certain moral standing if they didn't believe that that was the best
> >>> way to reduce harm to animals?
>
> >> Your question is absurd. *Their belief about the effect and sufficiency
> >> of "veganism" is false, and therefore so is their belief about their
> >> moral standing.
>
> > But they do have the belief,
>
> It's nothing but a façade; completely unreal. *All they really have is
> their own ego. *All they care about is themselves.

I fail to see how you've given any rational grounds for thinking that.