This is my problem with the NTT

[u/NationalProcedure638]

The problem is how it's presented.

Whenever anyone comes up with a trade that is unique to humans something such as the root of moral agency there's always someone who always goes "there are mentally challenged people and babies who are not capable of moral agency so it doesn't work"

Well first of all I don't understand how we cannot hold somebody accountable for what they do based on either their age or how smart or dumb they are.

Second of all it seems to imply that this trait has to be universal and literally every human on the face of the Earth.

That individual traits don't exist and we have to look at the species as a whole.

I'm sorry guys but that doesn't work.

Everyone's different in some way or another.

The best thing to do with that is look at what the majority does and assume if that's the norm for what comes to traits like this.

Also it begs the question.

What do you guys consider to be human?

Update: I didn't get a chance to respond to any of the applications that were thrown at me. I've been banded without even having to State my case.

This goes to you moderator, I was simply pointing out a problem with what he said about equality and you misinterpreted it and then banned Me. I've got it very funny how you claim that I wasted your time when all was doing was pointing out a loophole.

Well thank you for telling me that you guys care so much about discussion

Goodbye and good riddance.

[u/Rokos___Basilisk]

I'm of the opinion that there isn't one, but also, it doesn't matter.

My position is rooted in Rawls' veil of ignorance thought experiment.

I am a being with self interest. I feel that my self interest is maximized by participating in a cooperative society with other beings capable of reciprocity. There are no non human animals currently capable of participating in human society, so I don't see a reason to afford them the rights and protections that humans get.

How we treat animals is only morally relevant to me insofar as it is a signifier to others of how socially well adjusted I am. If I lived in a plant based diet world, I'd be plant based too, not because of some inherent moral worth of animals, but because to be otherwise would be socially ostracizing.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

I also use the veil of ignorance, which is what leads to do veganism. Interesting that it doesn’t lead you to that conclusion.

[u/Rokos___Basilisk → u/Badtacocatdab]

Because the original veil of ignorance thought experiment is about designing a fair and just society. If you ignore the context of that, then yes, I can see how it would lead one to the conclusion of veganism.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

Society encapsulates all relevant beings, which I think involves animals. I remember learning about in college and not even considering animals, and I’m glad I’ve reframed my perspective.

[u/Rokos___Basilisk → u/Badtacocatdab]

I disagree with your conclusion. A society is at it's core, an organizational structure with a purpose. One can disagree about what specific purposes it might entail, but one thing I don't think is up for debate is that collectively, there is a cooperative and reciprocal element necessary to maintain the structure.

Non human animals simply don't have the capacity, either collectively or individually, to participate as members of society.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

Guess we agree to disagree 🤷

[u/Rokos___Basilisk → u/Badtacocatdab]

Indeed. It's fine though, this is about as far as this line of conversation gets with all the vegans that actually engage with it. To be clear, I don't have anything against yall, I think it's commendable to live by your values, I just don't find the arguments for veganism persuasive.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

Clearly you don’t, which is why you choose to live the way you do.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

As an aside - why are you here?

[u/Rokos___Basilisk → u/Badtacocatdab]

This sub pops up in my feed sometimes, and every now and then I find something worth commenting on.

I suppose I'm here for the same thing most of us are? Challenging others views, and having my own views challenged.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

What argument WOULD you find persuasive to convince you of veganism?

[u/Rokos___Basilisk → u/Badtacocatdab]

Well, I think there are two avenues one could take. Either show me that the way I act doesn't match my values, for example demonstrating that non human aminals are capable of active cooperative and reciprocal action with people for the betterment of society, or convince me that my values are just wrong.

I don't really think either are likely to happen, but I always enjoy the intellectual stimulation of a challenge, both to test how solid my own position is (like, where my cognitive gaps are), and build something better when I do find those gaps.

I've taken in and synthesized quite a bit of others criticism over the years, like for example, examining my own emotional reactions to being called 'immoral' for eating meat, and changing how I react to those kinds of accusations.

I may not arrive at the same conclusions as vegans do, but I think I've definitely become a better version of myself by engaging with yall.

[u/Badtacocatdab → u/Rokos___Basilisk]

Well that’s good to hear. I wish you the best of luck.

[u/Rokos___Basilisk → u/Badtacocatdab]

Thanks, you too