• @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    13 months ago

    as kant said, cruelty is bad. you ought not kick a dog, for instance, but there is no contradiction in animal agriculture itself. if some operations are acting cruelly, we should admonish them. otherwise, tehre is no reason to believe non-human animals can participate in an ethical society, so there is no reason to include them in our ethical systems.

    • @Emerald@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      13 months ago

      tehre is no reason to believe non-human animals can participate in an ethical society, so there is no reason to include them in our ethical systems.

      But we do. You mentioned how you ought not to kick a dog, for instance. The difference is that we treat some animals as companions while treating others as resources for exploitation. If you truly believe that there is no reason to be ethical to animals, why not kick that dog? Or maybe boil it alive?

      • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        13 months ago

        why not kick that dog?

        again, kant discourages cruelty as a practice toward non-human animals, as it may lead to practicing cruelty toward people. that’s it. it’s not including them in our morality.

          • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            13 months ago

            practicing cruelty is bad, but animal agriculture is not cruelty in and of itself. if a particular operation is acting cruelly, they should be admonished.

            • @Emerald@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              13 months ago

              animal agriculture is not cruelty in and of itself. if a particular operation is acting cruelly, they should be admonished.

              I would argue that animal agriculture is cruelty in and of itself. It’s forcing animals into small cages, forcibly impregnating them, stealing their babies, cutting off their tails, and then painfully murdering them. It’s a cruel operation