If we apply this decision making process to ethics, we end up with consequentialism (as defined by the IEP):
Consequentialism is the view that morality is all about producing the right kinds of overall consequences. Here the phrase "overall consequences" of an action means everything the action brings about, including the action itself. For example, if you think that the whole point of morality is (a) to spread happiness and relieve suffering, or (b) to create as much freedom as possible in the world, or (c) to promote the survival of our species, then you accept consequentialism.
Although those three views disagree about which kinds of consequences matter, they agree that consequences are all that matters. So, they agree that consequentialism is true.
During today’s meeting, I asked you to consider the consequences of eating meat produced by factory farms (i.e. meat from most supermarkets). Is it morally right or wrong? Can you make a reasonable/philosophical argument to support your beliefs/actions regarding the eating of meat?
5 comments:
I don't think it's generally in anything's interest or tendancy to wonder where the food it's eating came from..animals eat to survive, and if an animal is hungry enough, it's not going to care whether or not it's food died happy.
But, certain people in places of the world have reached a level of abundance, where they eat when they don't have to. The united states probably has enough money and resources in food production to make their tastey meat production methods a little less obscene...but not if the money keeps flowing in..
And though I don't know this to be true, since it's entirely unreasonable to not believe that there are still starving people in this country, that this lust for food from the people who already have to much is what let this thing get out of hand.
Animals are used to being hungry. A great deal of "lesser" animals, mostly frogs and other amphibians, are known to gorge themselves to death if they are in the presence of too much food..and humans consistently seem to be pretty typical animals, albeit glorified ones. Once again I think this is just another example of mankind's animal instincts getting too large scale for us to control
You're right. If you've noticed, when you go into any given restaurant, 99% of the entrees are meat-based. If were not going to stop it altogether, I agree we should atleast limit it to what we need, along with most all other things. But food would be a good start, maybe.
Great thoughts guys!
John, you hit upon 'needs'... we Americans habitually confuse wants with needs... do you have any ideas on how we can begin to better distinguish the two?
And I guess a follow-up question is, how do we begin to break our addictions to wants? How can we become content with having our needs met, and stop craving/stealing more?
Being content has always eluded me...
Don't worry about it mrb, you're still young ;)
Ian, Thanks for the chuckle... I sure don't feel young any more :(
Your comment invites an interesting query: Is there any rush to become moral? Should a person live frivolously until there old, clean up there act in the final hours/days of their life, and then die with a clear conscience… or is there some imperative to be moral now, regardless of whether one is young or old?
Post a Comment