If we could agree to pass and enforce legislation ensuring animals in factory farms live lives at least marginally better than not being born, is there still a moral case for veganism? Wouldn’t you endorse factory farming then for repugnant conclusion type reasons?
I'd be fine with eating meat if the animals existence was a net positive -- but this conclusion is controversial, even among utilitarians. (See here, for example https://philpapers.org/rec/JOHCAN). But this is obviously not the case if you read the conditions on factory farms. Indeed, if it were, the industry wouldn't be profitable -- it turns out that there's no profitable way to give 78 billion animals great lives. Additionally, I think we should be pretty uncertain even in cases where animals live positive lives for basic moral uncertainty reasons.
But I think this is all mostly a distraction. It would be like defending beating your dog to death by pointing out the mere existence of ethical pet ownership.
I agree with this assessment 100% but I do get annoyed when vegans will answer "no, it is better the animal didn't exist at all then it exist and live a happy life but then be slaughtered brutally".
It's not REALLY a problem, pragmatically, but it still grinds my gears due to the philosophical inconsistency, and because when not inconsistent it ends up justifying shit like anti-natalism which is even more egregiously wrong and stupid.
But, again, stupid != harmful. The meat-eaters and defenders are always more harmful than any annoying philosophically illiterate vegan.
If we could agree to pass and enforce legislation ensuring animals in factory farms live lives at least marginally better than not being born, is there still a moral case for veganism? Wouldn’t you endorse factory farming then for repugnant conclusion type reasons?
I'd be fine with eating meat if the animals existence was a net positive -- but this conclusion is controversial, even among utilitarians. (See here, for example https://philpapers.org/rec/JOHCAN). But this is obviously not the case if you read the conditions on factory farms. Indeed, if it were, the industry wouldn't be profitable -- it turns out that there's no profitable way to give 78 billion animals great lives. Additionally, I think we should be pretty uncertain even in cases where animals live positive lives for basic moral uncertainty reasons.
But I think this is all mostly a distraction. It would be like defending beating your dog to death by pointing out the mere existence of ethical pet ownership.
I agree with this assessment 100% but I do get annoyed when vegans will answer "no, it is better the animal didn't exist at all then it exist and live a happy life but then be slaughtered brutally".
It's not REALLY a problem, pragmatically, but it still grinds my gears due to the philosophical inconsistency, and because when not inconsistent it ends up justifying shit like anti-natalism which is even more egregiously wrong and stupid.
But, again, stupid != harmful. The meat-eaters and defenders are always more harmful than any annoying philosophically illiterate vegan.