Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by graindcafe 1930 days ago
I think I'm somehow in the same situation, trying to avoid industrial farming in benefit of local, small farming. I can know for sure (for some of them) that the animal was well treated from the beginning of its life to the very end.

I am asking myself if it is better for the animal to live a decent life even if it is to be killed and ate at the end or not to live at all.

1 comments

My hang up is basically this:

If I want the animal to have a good life, why do I/should I get to (or even want to) decide when and why that life should end? It seems very contradictory to me and necessitates a need for the taking of the thing I’m apparently attaching value to.

Also I know I don’t physically kill these animals on a stop watch, but I vote for their death with my wallet. I don’t see a significant difference. Actually, I think it’s somewhat worse than it I carried it out myself. That’s why I generally try to only eat seafood that I selectively harvest while diving. I can guarantee the final moments were as brief as humanly possible and the rest of its life were as nature intended.

So, I really struggle with this one part where I decide the animal has worth and should therefor have a good existence. However, I’m also deciding it should only have that until I decide I want to deep fry its muscles or something. So it must be that I’m deciding to be a benevolent killer or something, which is certainly better than a ruthless one, but leaves me a uncomfortable nonetheless. I need to justify my own need or desire to continue killing, or at least profiting from the killing.

That’s the part I can’t do so far. Do I actually need to eat them? No, so far I really don’t. My health is still good after quite a while and the initial cravings have subsided. Do I want to eat them? No, not anymore, although I do miss it from a culinary perspective. Does that justify killing them? Well, would it justify killing someone’s dog if I thought dogs were delicious? Or any dog? No, never - the notion is absurd.

Well. I suppose some people eat dogs. This has a significant cultural element to it.

Nonetheless I really can’t bring myself to convince myself that I have any good reason to eat animals. Though admittedly I make an exception for fish and shellfish. I feel strange about that. I mean, when I get in the water those fish are arguably smarter than I am. One thing I justify the action by is that at least in the water they have a natural chance and environmental advantage. It isn’t a relationship of control and systematic murder from birth to death.

In time I suspect I’ll stop eating fish too. I don’t know.

The more I think about it the more it becomes an existential matter to be honest.

I don't see why your reasoning shouldn't also apply to fish and shellfish as it does to other animals?

> would it justify killing someone’s dog if I thought dogs were delicious?

That's a bit silly. Regardless of the ethics of eating meat, there are a whole bunch of other reasons why you wouldn't kill someone's pet. Just like you don't dive into people's fish tanks for your seafood :)