View Single Post
  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Rupert
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Dutch wrote:
> "Rupert" > wrote
> >
> >
> > Dutch wrote:
> >> > wrote
> >>
> >> [..]
> >>
> >> > I think you'll find "factory-farming" usually refers to the intensive
> >> > rearing of animals. Have you got a justification for calling
> >> > mono-culture crop production "factory-farming"?
> >>
> >> Don't like people turning your pet pjoratives back on you eh?
> >>

> >
> > Well, "factory-farming" is a simple descriptive term.

>
> It carries much more baggage than that.
>
> > It doesn't matter
> > very much what it actually refers to, I was just surprised that he
> > thought this was a correct application of the word.

>
> I realize that, because you don't fancy yourself as supporting "factory
> farming".
>
> Vegans typically have idealized views of themselves.
>


Well, be that as it may, I have provided you with no further evidence
for this view. I was surprised to hear monoculture-crop production
referred to as "factory farming", because I have always heard this
phrase used to refer to the intensive farming of animals. If he's right
about the correct application of the word (which I'm not convinced of),
then so be it. I have no problem with the idea that I support "factory
farming", so construed. What I *desire* about myself - not "fancy about
myself" - is that I contribute to as little animal suffering as
possible. If anyone thinks that's not the case, I'm interested to hear
what he has to say on the matter.

> > Anyway, I intended (correctly or otherwise) to use the word to refer to
> > intensive rearing of animals. Furthermore this clearly involves a lot
> > more suffering than what he was referring to.

>
> Does it? How do you know? How much animal death and suffering results from
> cultivation, planting, spraying, harvesting, storage protection, etc, etc..
>


(1) The number of animals involved is greater, and
(2) The suffering inflicted on each animal is greater.

Perhaps (1) is false when we take into account all the animals killed
by the plant production necessitated by animal food production. But
it's not false if we're only talking about the amount of plant
production that would be necessary to support universal veganism. Davis
estimates the death toll at 1.8 billion. More animals than that are
killed in animal food production. And each animal suffers considerably
more.

> >> > Anyway, it's all very well to abuse me for supporting these practices,
> >> > but you don't offer any serious alternative to doing so. If you had a
> >> > serious proposal for my further reducing the contribution I make to
> >> > animal suffering then I would consider it.
> >>
> >> Stop supporting commercial agriculture, it kills countless billions
> >> of animals. Anyway, it's you who proposed that killing animals is
> >> to be avoided, why should we now determine for you how you
> >> are going to live up to it? Do your own homework.

> >
> > I'm sorry, can you quote me as saying that buying products whose
> > production involved the death of animals is absolutely prohibited? I
> > don't think you can.

>
> I see, so it's fine to cause death and suffering of animals when it fits
> conveniently into your chosen lifestyle but not when it fits into mine.
>


That's not a very reasonable interpretation of my argument. I believe
in a principle enunciated by David DeGrazia in "Taking Animals
Seriously": Make every reasonable effort to avoid providing financial
support to practices that cause or support unnecessary harm. I believe
that, on any reasonable interpretation of this principle, this will
require veganism or near-veganism. It's not altogether clear to me that
it requires me to stop supporting commercial agriculture. That depends
on what's involved in "making every reasonable effort". I am
open-minded on this matter. Maybe you can persuade me that "making
every reasonable effort" does require that I stop supporting commercial
agriculture. Or maybe you can persuade me that I should accept some
more stringent moral principle, which would require me to stop
supporting commercial agriculture. Go for it. But it requires some
argument.

> > What I do think is that we should make every
> > reasonable effort to minimize our contribution to the suffering of
> > animals. And I have done my homework on that, I believe that the best
> > way to do it is to become vegan. If you've got some suggestions for how
> > I can do better I'm happy to listen to them.

>
> A typical vegan could reduce the net amount of animal death and suffering
> associated with his or her diet by the introduction of some carefully
> selected meat, fish or game, a person who supplements their diet by hunting
> or fishing for example.


Fishing? Fishing involves a fairly high death rate per serving of food.
I would want to see some more evidence that fishing will do any good.
And one problem with hunting is that not all of the animals are killed,
some of them are just seriously maimed. So the amount of suffering and
death caused per serving of food is higher than it appears at first.
Where do you suggest I go hunting, anyway? Or where do you suggest I
buy my meat? And what is your evidence that this will actually *reduce*
the amount of animal death and suffering I contribute to?

> Also a person who also grows much of their own food
> *and* consumes meat probably does much better than that typical urban vegan.
>


Consumes what sort of meat?

Growing more of my own food seems like a better proposal. I'll consider
that one.

> Don't misunderstand, I am not suggesting you do these things, I am just
> asking you to acknowledge that they are viable choices.
>


Sure they are. But I'm not sure you've offered any practical
suggestions that will definitely reduce my contribution to animal death
and suffering, except possibly growing some of my own food.

> > I'm not altogether convinced that the suggestion "stop supporting
> > commerical agriculture" is entirely feasible for me. If you've got some
> > ideas as to how I can do it I'm happy to listen to those, as well.

>
> Of course "feasible" is something you define for yourself. I would like you
> to show me the respect to allow me to do the same for myself.


There is a limit to the reasonable application of words. There is no
reasonable sense in which it is "unfeasible" to become vegan. It is
feasible for me to reduce the extent to which I support commerical
agriculture, but to stop supporting it - well, I'd just be interested
to hear how you propose I would go about doing that.