[EvilEy3]

> It's clear that humans over-consume and as an "intelligent species" who can make decisions based on morality and ethics, we still collectively seem unable to logically reason this overconsumption will eventually effect us all.

Why should individuals that live for themselves and don't share the same values as you do suffer because of your decisions?

[Planktonne]

> Why should individuals that live for themselves and don't share the same values as you do suffer because of your decisions?

This is an argument against eating octopuses. Why should they suffer because of your decisions?

[bodelecta]

You've summed it up in your sentence "live for themselves" i.e. greed and selfishness. And what do you mean by suffer? Do you mean the richest people earning less or people in poverty?

We could live in a more ethical and sustainable way, we just choose not to

[EvilEy3]

> You've summed it up in your sentence "live for themselves" i.e. greed and selfishness.

There's a line between exploiting others and caring for yourself. I consider myself example of second. I couldn't care less about rest of people.

> We could live in a more ethical and sustainable way, we just choose not to

I could live without shower and toilet paper, I could live without washing machine or meat. Doesn't mean that I want to.

If you want to live in more ethical and sustainable way — all the power to you. But don't force your moral onto me.

E: morale -> moral

[bodelecta]

Wow, I'm surprised you actually typed that out in public but fair play for being honest

> I couldn't care less about rest of people.

I can clearly see that

> I could live without shower and toilet paper, I could live without washing machine or meat. Doesn't mean that I want to.

Overconsumption isn't having toilet paper or a shower, those are necessities. Drilling in the Arctic for more oil, shark finning, the strive for constant economic growth are examples of overconsumption

[EvilEy3]

> I couldn't care less about rest of people. When it comes to either me or them*.

Small fix to clarify. I'm not some cynical edgelord, don't misunderstand, I probably care a fair bit more about other people than your average person. But when it comes to situation where I have to give up something that I don't consider morally absurd, well then we have a problem.

> Overconsumption isn't having toilet paper or a shower, those are necessities. Drilling in the Arctic for more oil, shark finning, the strive for constant economic growth are examples of overconsumption

Sure. But we're discussing food here. I don't see why me, an average Joe, has to discard of the only joys of my life because someone thinks that it is morally correctly to switch to artificial meat.

[8note]

Toilet paper and showers are not necessities.

Plenty of people don't have those, and survive just fine

[bodelecta]

> Toilet paper and showers are not necessities.

Bacteria will form on your skin and can lead to infection. Maybe that's the answer to population growth, never shower or excercise good hygiene measures therefore increasing mortality rates.

We don't need to clean our teeth either right? We can lower food consumption through that too.

Very, very strange replies.

[EvilEy3]

Oh, I'm sure of it. I want to live comfortable life, not survive.