• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Is “more ethical” really enough if you accept that plants can suffer? You’re still essentially saying one group of living things’ suffering is acceptable to you. Isn’t that like saying the holocaust of the Jews was bad, but the holocaust of the Roma at the same time was fine because there were fewer Roma than Jews? Does “less” matter when we’re talking quantities so massive?

    I don’t think there are easy answers to any of these questions. Not if you want to approach them from an honest philosophical level.

    • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      If our ability to modify ourselves reaches sci fi levels, allowing us to photosynthesize and fix amino acids from nitrogen in the atmosphere (or if there’s any hope of making that happen), then that likely will be the new vegan position.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Photosynthesis would probably not work too well for people who aren’t outside a lot. But there might be other possibilities.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I know you’re being flippant, but I do like the idea of coming up with a variety of ways for humans to get food which don’t require life at all. Finding a way to make a construction worker photosynthetic but also finding a way for an office worker to be chemosynthetic. Hydrogen and methane are in abundance on the planet and bacteria can use them as food. Maybe one day we can too