Look like sheep to me.

Cooking random vegetables the way people here eat them is whatever... done in minutes and it's not attractive actually in taste just tolerable if you have meat and potatoes in them too or rice and meat, cheese milk and bread etc. You eat them no problem all is good. Try to eat them alone and good luck in experience if you cook them fast that way. Of course you will eat them but nothing special. How enticing steamed or lightly boiled broccoli above other food is? You just eat it. Properly cooked in more time in low heat with olive oil and lemon, salt etc is better. Effort is needed! Ask Zeno how he cooks his garden products. I bet it takes some time to do it nice.

I can have it all in 20 min in some rice cooking main task, that i throw vegetables on top of it midway because i dont care for niceties. Some broccoli, peas, corn, carrots and other stir fry frozen mixes on top of the boiling rice and in low temperature heat, i cook for 10-15 more minutes (i let the rice cook first alone then add them on top) and its all good then. But again not exciting if it weren't for the rice or potatoes or the additional accompanying animal products (milk, eggs, cheese meat or fish etc in small quantities).

However if you spend 1h or 1.5 h or 3 hours and do the recipes i linked then they rule alone and you do not need any meat, they are great alone with maybe some cheese and bread (no eggs, no meat, nothing needed not even milk etc).

That is the point about time. Now i dont exactly trust made up processed packages that i throw in a microwave or whatever as easy solution. I like to know what i am cooking actually and how it got there to that state. So i select fresh or frozen vegetables but not processed vegetables. Of course the processing could be minimal and harmless too. Lets find out.

Now i can imagine some nice quick mixing of ingredients that is done in 10-15 min is good looking and this is why i asked for recipes here even with microwaves. Where i come from proper vegetable themed meals take time to prepare and they rule the day. That is the problem. Time and boring rituals. In some shows including asian ones, they make things look easy and fast because they do not show how much time they need in advance to prepare everything for the quick cooking they show (or they use high temperatures that is a little problem). But it does take time and plenty of utensils and you have to clean up the mess also eventually. It's a real job, cooking in traditional greek cuisine.

There are two bulls in the herd with that sheepy style coat, but they look like bulls. Anyone's guess who's the dad of which. I see enough cows humping to last 3 lifetimes. What's really freak is when they poop while they eat. 🤣🤢 In one way, out the other.
Baby cows just look cute like spring innocence though.

At least you can admit it’s a problem. They say that’s the first step.

I acknowledge your experience to be just that- your experience. That’s what I’m defending. But I’m not only defending your experience, I’m defending our experience. I’m including animals in “our” because they also have experience. Right?

How do you contest a position on an ethical issue without coming off a little self-righteous?
What would you suggest to those looking for a more subtle approach so that people might be more open to the idea?

Personally, I was never really bothered by the approach of people arguing for ethical veganism. No one ever attempted to force me to convert. It was all done through a civil exchange of ideas. Once I accepted that meat consumption is problematic, the idea of it became uncomfortable. Still I wouldn’t blame the proponents who swayed me for the uncomfortable feeling, like I wouldn’t blame someone for pointing out that my shoe is untied.

Then don't be. Be part of the 98% of the vegetarians who are non-militant.

But seriously, it's an immature defense mechanism tossing the blame where it doesn't belong. Face it, you still eat meat because you enjoy it and it's what you're use to. Partial credit for admitting the wrongdoing though.

You don't.

You let people live their lives and make their own choices and mistakes.
I eat meat for a variety of reasons. Intense resistance exercise regime that leaves me exhausted all week, i enjoy variety in cooking (more than the usual person, I get bored with the same food very quickly), enjoy being ethically amoral or unpredictable (don't care for politics or "the issues of the day"), don't look at life as being a serious state of affairs.

Most importantly, I can see how eating animals is unethical to utilitarians and many people who value the avoidance of suffering - highly - and I sympathise with their views. However these are not my views. My views on the existence of the bad and the good, see them as two sides of the same coin; as interdependent; as mutually necessary. Without one, you cant have the other, and vice versa. If I do something bad, so long as I can live with it, I'm ok with that.

I know much of this you may not sympathise with and that's ok too.

True. But where it belongs is always up for debate. Criticism should never be criticized on the basis that it is merely criticism.... for the fact that some criticism is justified...
M Do you like being a vegetarian for different reasons?

They are giant cats

What is the wrongdoing in ethical terms again about a chicken not being awaken one day after it has lived 2 years say so that it becomes the food that you will eat over a week in parts together with other plant food? All life is about death all the time. Your body kills millions of life forms during the day to survive. To cultivate your vegetables land has been used that would have allowed others animals to be there and all kinds of insects and little animals have been wiped out to allow the plants to flourish. Are you conveniently forgetting that?

I have a clear understanding of ethics when a higher complexity animal is killed. I do recognize the loss when a human is gone. I do recognize the loss when a dog is killed also but i have no sympathy for a hostile dog that is attacking random people all the time. None! I do have some concern about how the dog got to that state and who is "responsible" if anyone but i will recognize nothing important lost if it disappeared unless it can be somehow reformed and improve (but even that how important is it really vs the risk of attacking more people?). What is the loss when a chicken is gone if it is one of thousands random chickens in a general farm going around all day eating and walking around without any other purpose of design in place?

In ethical decisions one weighs what is lost. What is lost here that is more important than a human being fed and having a good day? What is lost is the sense of guilt if the chicken is suffering all its life until it is fed enough to become your dinner. But if i can design a system that the chicken has a good still totally repetitive and not intelligently evolving life of enjoyment, what is lost if it doesnt wake up one day and another one younger takes its place? No higher complexity is lost for the universe!

A chicken in the wild can have smaller life expectancy and suffer extremes in its daily survival battle. By existing in a good farm it has lived a life better than the random natural wild nature one by a great deal more and then it dies one day. What is the major thing that makes this unethical if the benefit is to feed a human? Why is it it unethical to not eat only life forms that have no higher senses and consciousness. Just because one has a higher awareness than a plant doesn't make that existence suddenly vastly important to rise to the level of unethical removal when it is taken out. Most animals do not even recognize themselves in a mirror. What is lost? Animals die every day in the wild. You want this stopped? It gave evolution!!! Their death is precisely why we are intelligent today. The greatest possibility for complexity has been built on the cycle of life. That very cycle is the origin of intelligence and ethics. We wouldn't have anything without it. It is indeed access to easier more enjoyable and nutritious energetically dense if needed food that will enable higher ethical worlds to be created.

masque, we've already discussed this. Why do you insist on repeating yourself?

Also, you are not making any strong arguments, whatsoever. Just skimming your post, yes, kill a dog if in self defense, and kill insects if they are a pest. In fact, as I mentioned, sacrifce lab rats if it helps sick humans. But killing an animal for food when there are endless vegetarian options is completely unnecessary.

"No higher complexity if lost?" Wtf is that suppose to mean. If we had a metric to quantify consciousness, then of course chicken would have rate to have higher consciousness and complexity then a piece of broccoli or glass of milk.

Not really. And I use to enjoy eating meat for the same reasons Veedz does, except for the "amoral" part. If I were a vegetarian for health reasons, then I would be eating lean meat maybe 1-2x per week. Also, I'm not religious.

I do not repeat myself, i refine and improve my arguments and you never really deal with them. WTF higher complexity means? Learn what it means. It means your daily life has interesting complex thoughts and designs that produce a purpose in waking up tomorrow that is not existing in chickens.

Also they are not better options in diet with only vegetables, you have wrongly convinced yourself so at the loss of quality of life in your meal enjoyment and there is nothing substantial lost when a low intelligence repetitive daily ritual life animal is gone after it has lived well before. I can make the process happen without pain. I can improve the industry. You fail to recognize the importance it has for a higher intelligence animal to have a happy existence that its food variety provides. You do not get any substantial number of calories with plant food. You need to be eating 5-6 times a day or you need someone to prepare it for you .

This is precisely why we have civilization because we dont have to be eating and harvesting food 24/7 like other stupid animals do all day including apes. I do not have time for this bs. How long do you take to cook some decent beans or lentils? It takes me over 1 h to prepare things properly so that its enjoyable. I like salads too. It takes me 0.5-1 h to prepare a good one. I do it often and i know. Furthermore if people get enjoyment in their daily meals they will be less of aholes to others around them all day because they have already received their fix the right way. We should test how ethical vegetarians and most importantly vegans are to other people all day while we are at it.

All i am proposing is a 90-10 diet. It is more balanced and more enjoyable.

The moment you religiously have stopped mixing things you have become a slave of a stupid philosophy in order to gain a tiny 3% health edge vs a sensible diet person while you lose 10-20% of your quality of life.

Then what are you doing here arguing in defense of your ethical position? Are you not also coming off a little self-righteous? If self-righteousness is not a problem for you in your current position then I find it strange that you’d think… Is it strictly an issue of image? Like it’s uncool? I thought that “Moralists are image-obsessed attention seekers in disguise.” Now amoralists too? Or when you say "some" are you referring to others excluding yourself?

Without exception?

It takes you an hour to make a decent salad?

You do repeat yourself, that too in great length. I've broken your arguments in multiple quotes and addressed your points individually in the past.

Regarding chicken complexity, we're not debating whether we should chicken or humans, so you're comparison to humans is irrelevant and silly. But using your guide as complexity determining what we should eat and not eat, then clearly any food source that doesn't terminate the life of an animal is superior alternative to eating meat.

You don't think killing animals happens without pain? Am I suppose to believe that fish are taken out of the water and jump up and down, that they are performing a dance? Or that when crabs are boiled alive they're enjoying a warm bath? Or that when a cow is separated from its young to be slaughtered, that its calves are enjoying independence? Should I go on?

You can easily get a substantial amount calories (and proteins) from non-meat foods. I've shared my diet in a previous post.

You can spend hours or cooking either meats or non-meat food. I microwave my food, so I don't spend more than 5 minutes preparing any meal. I also don't have to worry about bacteria present in raw meats. You'll even save on cleanup time.

And lol at saying people are aholes for not enjoying meat. Great argument.

Last, it's a strawman to assume that I do it for health reasons, especially when I made very clear why I don't eat meat. And just because I adopt a different lifestyle than yours, doesn't make it a religious philosophy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk

lol wrongdoing. And lol at attaboys for "admitting" it. Religiosity, the soft sell.

Pointing out observations and answering questions. I don't want you to be a meat eater. I think what you're doing is good for you.
I'm not sure if you're reading my posts or just selectively remembering them. Either way, if you don't like my observations or you find them hypocritical or even flat-out wrong, that's ok. I bid you a good weekend ahead.

Yes if you include all the little details and purchase time etc. I have about 7-8 things i put in it. I can list later when i have more time. Its great and it is for multiple meals, i refrigerate the mix and put oil vinegar etc later to it when i need it which allows it to be good for 2-3 days.

It is religious philosophy because most of vegans are religiously avoiding anything with meat products in it etc. So basically its about purist bs because clearly the same impact one has with 99.99% vegan is achieved with 98% also. But people are morons and do not realize that it is the 98% that is the real life decision not the 2% crap that is about being a stupid zealot now.

Well I don't know what is going on with my 2+2 interface but I am unable to use the quote function to quote anyone but masque.

Spank,
The bit about “admitting it’s a problem” was hyperbole. A failed attempt at humor. I guess it was lost over text.

Veedzz,
I don’t think you are trying to convert anyone to anything. I simply think you are contesting an ethical position. You suggested “some” might be put off by the image of self-righteousness associated with vegetarianism, which is why I asked how you contest an ethical position without coming off self-righteous. I’m trying to pin down your qualifier for self-righteousness. I can’t find anything in the definition of self-righteousness that necessitates an attempt to change others behavior.

In pointing out your issues with moralism you have shifted the argument outside the scope of ethics. But it still stands as an argument against vegetarianism. It’s like a back door to a position against vegetarianism that’s contingent upon the folly of morals.

Your claim seems to be the only way to avoid self-righteousness is to “let people live their lives and make their own mistakes”. Is that without exception?

FWIW I started the thread because I have been bouncing the ball off the wall, so to speak. I wanted others people thoughts. I know there are some really smart people here and this is the philosophy forum so I figured it’d be an appropriate place. I appreciate you sticking with it.

Makes sense for behavior fit for satire. However moral conversion behavior is really fit for more than just a dose of exaggeration. We could act to try to convert one another as equal forces of conversion and spend a lifetime mutually failing. One might even imagine ethics get involved about doing it.

Can vegetarians eat animal crackers?

I agree... it's kinda like when someone says Vag instead of vagina

Here is the problem really. Vegans think they change the world by promoting a better environment and saving animals that they dont have to die to be consumed by them. Wrong! As long as other people exist that are poor and can consume meat now that they have more money and population grows the prices will drop if consumption drops from vegans and the other people will increase meat consumption and nothing will change as it all becomes more efficient and uses even more animals.

Instead what one must do is eat everything and focus as much as possible in better nutrition that is mostly vegetarian and fruits and the better types of animal products and fish and high quality meat eaten in small quantities and cooked better regularly. At the same time promote better farming and treatment of animals through legislation and new companies.

Forget about wasting time to be a 99.99% purist and either be 99% or instead eat mostly vegetarian but dont have problem if you eat a few animal products here and there either , enjoy life and work towards scientific society so that one day animals will live happier and people wont have to even kill them or mass produce them to be killed eventually but let them die properly.

However it's moronic to think meat is unethical in all cases because animals die, some when they die are in perfect condition and their products are also ok in most cases or can be arranged to be ok by better organizing their treatment so that the milk or eggs are just fine products and not depriving anyone from anything really.

So enjoy life and eat any food group in balance and use your freedom and time saved when you consume high energy foods that take less time to prepare to design the better world and recognize that the planet will be saved the right way with massive breakthroughs and better leadership/organization not by thinking small that we can actually make a difference when so many other billions of people will happily take our place in this futile game of pseudo ethics.

I see vegans in youtube videos that think they have a difficult job finding proper food etc. I know a ton of greek dishes that are vegan approved that i can cook that will make me super happy to consume eternally and use only milk and eggs and cheese with them as bonus not really because its super needed ( because i am not stupid to think there is anything unethical about most non meat animal products as long as i also work to improve farming and animal treatment methods).

The problem is again time time and time! It takes a lot of time to make vegetarian and vegan food interesting and not a daily chore to eat but a joy.

I ask damn it to give me recipes that are fast and tasty and i get nothing nothing nothing but generic microwaving things references without any description in detail. The dishes i have linked here are all super tasty but they take time damn it. That is a massive problem. And i am not looking for restaurant vegan food or processed vegan food.

Now you want to change the world? Screw the religious avoidance of all micro weight ingredients in food you suspect is not 100% vegan that makes one a total zealot of unreasonable obsession and instead work to create AI that can cook for you healthy amazing value meals as soon as possible. Why not. Why is cooking so difficult to program in a robot? That is the solution and if i have to eat some meat and whatever to get to it i will damn right do so and be super ethical about it because i build the only future that will make a difference for good that way so my (and your) enjoyment while working for it is the most ethical choice that will get us there.


If one eats 70 gr of meat every day they consume over a year 25 kgr that is not even a big animal or possibly only a few chickens and 1/10 of a pig or 1/30th of a cow or 5-10 fishes. Wow what a crime!

Seems to me the ideal strategy is to try to minimize meat consumption to only the best of choices available and with the best cooking methods and try to enhance natural foods focusing on fruit and vegetables and starches and use animal products in moderation as enhancers of the core plant based diet. Move from 70 to 50 or 40gr per day.

So why would one be forced to religiously avoid the tiniest consumption of animal products? There is nothing essential gained in ethics or value by going to the 100% if you are already at 90-95%. It is only a tiny extra step that is not worthy of the burden in my opinion. I applaud someone that can find balance in only plant food and feel happy for their choice but i also find it unreasonable to be obsessed with the 100% and i think they should also research if their diet now covers all that they need given that a lot of vitamin D comes from milk usually and plant protein is not exactly complete alone or requires serious balancing of many different sources. And then there is the issue of time that is not trivial. Convenience if your work is ethical 95% of the day for the greater good of the planet may be the reason its 95% and not 50%. One must be happy with their food.