The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.
Should we all stop driving cars and become vegans? And while you’re at it, get up out of that comfy armchair!
In the comment thread for this entry, Michael Anissimov wrote:
The easiest things we can do immediately to cease generating negative utility is to become vegan and stop driving cars. Also, to echo Aleksei; why worry about a lack of focus or commitment to traditional leftist projects? Their current support is immense. Why do people need you to tell them to support them?
Then Aleksei Riikonen added:
It is, by the way, quite telling that folks like Mike Treder and James Hughes *don’t* find it necessary to promote veganism, even though they start on this “meanwhile, there is suffering” line.
It’s probably because they like the sort of “ethics” that mostly just means writing on the internet how other people are evil, but they don’t like the sort of ethics that would have actual implications for their own real day-to-day choices.
There are three points I’d like to make in response to these comments. The first is about Aleksei’s accusation that James Hughes and I are essentially lazy liberals who only complain but don’t make any hard choices; the second is about the alleged surfeit of support for “traditional leftist projects”; and the third is about veganism and driving cars.
With regard to the first item—the assertion that we at the IEET are little more than armchair activists—I hesitate even to dignify that attack with a response. I’m bringing it up mainly as an example of the type of snide flamebait that we have little tolerance for and normally will not approve for posting. Aleksei has already been warned that his comments will receive extra scrutiny since he seems inclined toward such juvenile nastiness.
But this goes for everyone, not only Aleksei. We want this site to be “a center for voices arguing for a responsible, constructive, ethical approach to the most powerful emerging technologies.” Thus, destructive and irresponsible voices will find no audience here. As for Aleksei’s supposition that James and I don’t put our words into action, anyone who is genuinely interested can easily learn out about my record of working for what I believe to be the common good (often at my own considerable expense), and Dr. Hughes has a long history of engagement with causes that he has supported through endless hours of volunteer work. Without trying to be defensive, all I can say is that Aleksei makes himself look pretty stupid by trying to pin that label on either one of us.
As for Michael’s contention that the “current support is immense” for traditional leftist projects, I have to ask, quoting U.S. Representative Barney Frank, “On what planet do you spend most of your time?”
If Michael has been paying any attention at all to the ongoing debate over health insurance reform, he must be aware that support for even moderate change is fast dwindling. Meanwhile, the potential for gains on other traditional leftist projects—like a properly progressive tax system, or a basic income guarantee, or a significant reduction in defense spending, or urgent action on climate change—is basically zilch. It is only because people in the left-wing blogosphere along with other online progressive activists are working so hard to keep these and other initiatives alive that we can have any hope at all. The fact that we elected a center-left Democrat as President does not mean that the U.S. is well on its way to becoming a European-style social democracy. Far from it.
Now, on the topic of cars and veganism, I have not owned a car for more than six years: I’m a proud supporter and user of mass transit. Or a bicycle. Or walking. And although I’m not a strict vegetarian, I do eat meat only sparingly, maybe twice a week or so.
But it’s not about me. The question here is whether veganism, or for that matter, public transportation, is something that technoprogressives should adopt as part of a policy platform.
Most of us would agree, I think, that mass transit is intrinsically a good idea. If it can be provided at a reasonable cost and with substantial efficiency, then it seems a no-brainer. Of course we want it. The concept that anyone has an inalienable right to own and drive their own car seems like an anachronism, a relic of the petroleum era, and hardly worth debating.
Veganism is another story.
There are at least three good reasons to become a vegan/vegetarian and to encourage others in that choice. First, it’s generally healthier, assuming that you replace the meat and dairy in your diet with wholesome alternatives like fresh fruits and vegetables, plus nuts, seeds, and other grains. Second, it’s better for the environment, since the carbon footprint of a vegan diet is a lot smaller than that of a meat-based diet. And third, because the way cows, pigs, chickens and other animals are treated in order to speed their growth and increase the profits of factory farm owners is truly reprehensible.
All of that makes a pretty strong argument in favor of dropping meat, and maybe dairy too, from our diets. Agreement about this, however, is not as monolithic as is support for public transportation. It’s similar, in a funny way, to the debate over the value of religion. Belief in the supernatural apparently is endemic to the human species and we have also evolved to be omnivores.
This doesn’t mean we can’t change our ways, of course. As intelligent, thinking animals, we can reject the tendency toward belief in superstition and we can also amend our natural eating habits, if we choose. And given the the three reasons for becoming vegan/vegetarian, it’s probably the moral choice.
“This doesn’t mean we can’t change our ways, of course. As intelligent, thinking animals, we can reject the tendency toward belief in superstition and we can also amend our natural eating habits, if we choose. And given the the three reasons for becoming vegan/vegetarian, it’s probably the moral choice.”
Indeed it’s all about “personal” moral choices, and therefore it is really all up to the individual. I have been a vegetarian of sorts for almost a decade now and no meat has passed my lips, yet like most humans I am also a hypocrite, as I still have milk in my coffee, and I still eat fish. (I’m still working onnit).
If you think about it, humans have a tendency towards eating flesh and even using the by-products, (fossilised carbon lifeforms), to feed our energy requirements, technology and cars. You could even say that we have evolved to become highly efficient techno-cannibals?
Yet this does not mean that cars are evil, quite the contrary, once a valid mass-produced equivalent to carbon fuel is devised, (Hydrogen fuel cells), we can all happily jump back into the driving seat once more.
My belief, (yet another!), is that everyone will eventually see the light and stop eating the flesh of animals, because it is barbaric and we don’t have to. However, it is up to technology to help provide an alternative, and this does not include growing genetic flesh! (Which is even more barbaric), but developing a protein based foodstuff cheaply and in abundance.
Well let’s not stop there, let’s steam ahead with this plan and vanquish famine from the world once and for all! Yet alas, (sighs), its all about politics and money in the end, as it always is and forever will be, until we can replace personal recompense with personal development, (some kind of carrot will always be required).
As far as superstition is concerned, was it not the Roman Catholic Church and St Paul, that sanctioned the eating of meat? Essenes and Manicheans still are vegans, and so too Jainism supports strict abstention including all root vegetables, most Buddhist and some Hindu sects include excluding meat, and it is strongly argued that even Jesus was himself a vegetarian.
Just how far back does this idea of vegetarianism go?
Mike, I enjoyed reading your response to Michael Anissimov. And let me first say that I have never been to this site before. I found it, quite by accident, so I only know what I have read here. I have to say that even though you made 3 excellent points for becoming a vegan I think the point that can’t be stressed too strongly is that it’s not just the cruelty but the life/death factor. This site is about ethics so I have to ask how can anyone who actually considers the ethics and or moralities of things uses animal products. As I alluded to earlier, it’s just not the inhumane torture these animals go through in the production of meat, dairy, and eggs(actually the dairy and eggs are much more inhumane than the beef),
but it’s the death of these innocents creatures that is so clear cut. How can it be OK to kill accept to survive? Clearly, based on an abundance of evidence, we, as humans, living in society, do not need to kill animals to survive. In fact we can thrive without the use of animals. I truly believe that anyone who supports the cruelty and/or death of these animals is either in denial or just chooses to ignore their own unethical behavior. But really what issue could be of more importance than one of life and death? I would appreciate hearing your further thoughts….
Another vegan here… And I too think it is the ethical and responsible decision to make.
However, it’s made to be a difficult one as economic institutions and cultural traditions are difficult to dismantle. On the former we must get our government to do shift it’s focus on support for the meat and dairy industries to a more sustainable and compassionate alternative.
The animal industries want everyone to believe that vegans want to digress into primitive technology. This simply is not the case. Indeed animal agriculture will keep us in yesterdays inefficient and unhealthy doomed practices.
Thanks for your honest reflection on the perplexing choices around veganism and vegetarianism and being a carnivore. I have been a vegetarian most of my life. And it isn’t always easy. I have recently tried moving to a more vegan diet - because it just makes moral and ethical sense. Honestly, I enjoy the taste of meat. But, that’s just it. I enjoy the *taste* of it. I don’t need it to survive - and even be more healthy. I like the taste. And why should millions of animals die every day because I just like a *taste*. The horrors they endure would be considered animal abuse under any other circumstances. Why is it “ok” to abuse, brutalize and consume them - simply to satisfy a transitory *taste*?
I have friends who say they honor the animals they are going to eat by “thanking them for their sacrifice” before they did into a plate of their flesh. Does anyone really think that an animal “sacrifices” itself for them?
Animals are brutalized at every step in the process. Would these same people eat their dogs and cats? At the very least, there should be a consistency in our ethical compass—but there is none when it comes to consuming animals for most people. These are beings who struggle against death until the last moment of life—just as we would under the same circumstances. Anyone who has seen an animal slaughtered would not forget the look in their eyes.
Two thoughts: pigs are considered among the most intelligent of creatures on earth. Yet we do unspeakable things to them. If intelligence were the criteria for selecting our dinner, we would not be eating pigs. (Although this might be a case for cannibalism!)
Last, a very wise gentleman, Pythagoras, had this to say:
“The earth affords a lavish supply of riches, of innocent foods, and offers you banquets that involve no bloodshed or slaughter; only beasts satisfy their hunger with flesh, and not even all of those, because horses, cattle, and sheep live on grass. As long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seeds of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love.”
Lets say that you knew of a farm that treats its animals very well. (Surely you don’t think none exist.)
On this farm, when it’s time to slaughter a cow, they use the most gentlest technique (I’ve heard that a single slice to the proper position on the neck with a perfectly smooth knife is relatively painless (Bessie told me herself)), maybe even less painful as dying of old age, dropping its carcass for the buzzards who might just start nibbling before the cow is fully dead.
It definitively is the moral choice to go vegan. You can’t justify beating up kids, raping women or confining nonhuman animals for your own pleasure.
There is no way of consuming any animal product if you want to be ethical. If we believe that it’s morally wrong to harm innocent beings, if we claim that we mustn’t inflict unnecessary suffering, then we have to live as vegans. We cannot deny that.
I’m so far towards the negative utilitarian spectrum that I’m not so sure it is ethical to bring a being into existence if it will suffer even a little bit. Though, my feelings on this matter are naturally hard to quantify.
I am glad you are seriously considering ethical question, but stop trying to look for excuses. You know it is wrong, and the potential for abuse is enormous, especially when profits is the only thing that is promoted by the incentive structures.
Even if the whole world were ethical consumers, there would be abuses, because we cannot spend all our time making sure each animal is well cared for.
The reality is that we massacre millions of intelligent and social animals with genetic code more similar than different to our own.
The problem with veganism, however, as Chana suggests, is that while it seems to be the obviously “correct” choice for several reasons, for many of us it’s not an easy habit to maintain.
I like the taste of meat, and even though I know it’s not necessarily a healthy choice and that the animals I’m consuming may have suffered (and obviously did die) before reaching my plate, I’ve never been able to stop eating meat completely. Humans are evolved to be omnivores, and so to make the change and stick with it is difficult, at least for me.
For some people it’s easier; my daughter became a vegetarian in her teens and has never had any trouble staying that way. I’m not so lucky. Maybe it’s a generational thing—I was raised eating meat at every meal—or maybe instinct just operates more strongly in some of us than in others.
Does anyone know of scientific studies on how easy or difficult it is to maintain a vegan/vegetarian diet?
So you support the murder of another living sentient being, if it’s done gently? I think as a transhumanist, death is the enemy and all things which cause death are repugnant.
To me, being vegan is about personhood (and the fact that I find murder wrong, but mostly personhood). If we as transhumanists continue to define personhood along species lines, we will never succeed.
@EmbraceUnity “I’m so far towards the negative utilitarian spectrum that I’m not so sure it is ethical to bring a being into existence if it will suffer even a little bit. Though, my feelings on this matter are naturally hard to quantify.”
Wow. Your mom knew that one day her newborn baby would get sick. Something tells me, though, that you don’t think she was unethical.
“and the potential for abuse is enormous,”
If we made all our decisions based on POTENTIAL for abuse, we wouldn’t get anywhere in life.
@Anonymous: “So you support the murder of another living sentient being, if it’s done gently?”
No. Can you answer why it is wrong for humans to gently kill cows, but it is not wrong when some monkeys cannibalize their competition.
“If we as transhumanists continue to define personhood along species lines, we will never succeed. “
If you back in time long enough, we have a common ancestor with tomatoes. Next time you eat a tomato, I’ll be sure to remind you how cruel you are. (just kidding)
@Brenda “Wow. Your mom knew that one day her newborn baby would get sick. Something tells me, though, that you don’t think she was unethical.”
But his/her mom sure didn’t become pregnant and raise him so that her child *would* get sick, or even worse so that she would make her child sick. Farm animals are force-bred for a purpose- and that is to be exploited (we take their milk, eggs, wool etc) and to be slaughtered (so that we can have their meat, skin etc) Animals are also used for entertainment, sports, experiments etc… If any of this was done to humans- no question- more people would be against it. These acts are perceived unethical, cruel and are ideally illegal- when done to humans. Whether an individual is white, black, male, female, baby, adult, christian, muslim, american, norwegian, mentally challenged, handicapped or not- doesn’t magically turn an unethical act into an ethical one. So why should it- if the individual has four instead of two legs, or feathers instead of hair? “The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?” (J. Bentham)
@Brenda “No. Can you answer why it is wrong for humans to gently kill cows, but it is not wrong when some monkeys cannibalize their competition.”
Did you mean to use that argument to defend cannibalism among humans? I suppose you didnt, but your comment is useless otherwise. I’m sure you *know* that vegans, just like any average sane person would never defend human cannibalism. But did you then mean that the animals we breed to torture to consume- are our competition? Cows, sheep, pigs, chickens etc, really??
Humans recognize the cruelty of cannibalism, rape, murder… despite the fact that these behaviours can be witnessed in the wild among other species. Since non-human behaviour (however “natural”) can’t be used to justify human behaviour, you can’t justify torture because you saw a monkey do it. But if you want to question human ethics in general, well, then veganism is your minor issue.
Additionally, unlike lions, tigers, polar bears and many other animals whose choice is between survival and starvation- we humans can easily choose not to kill. So if we can afford to be ethically consistent- and this in turn is better for the planet and for our health- seeing how it all makes sense- it’s difficult not to go vegan or at least try your very best to become one. I promise you, it’s NOT that difficult.
“But his/her mom sure didn’t become pregnant and raise him so that her child *would* get sick, or even worse so that she would make her child sick. “
x. That is a fair distinction which EmbraceUnity’s original comment didn’t lend itself for me to make.
“Did you mean to use that argument to defend cannibalism among humans? I suppose you didnt, but your comment is useless otherwise. “
x. No, there’s a third possibility, not that I’m denying my secret craving for cannibalism or anything. The comment’s use was to see how Anonymous would answer it. After all, he wrote “If we as transhumanists continue to define personhood along species lines, we will never succeed.” I wanted to see how someone who would put monkeys and people into the same category would—or could—find one act morally wrong and one not.
“I’m sure you *know* that vegans, just like any average sane person would never defend human cannibalism. But did you then mean that the animals we breed to torture to consume- are our competition? Cows, sheep, pigs, chickens etc, really?? “
x. Of course not. I could’ve just as easily chosen for my example any animal and its prey.
“Since non-human behaviour (however “natural”) can’t be used to justify human behaviour, you can’t justify torture because you saw a monkey do it. “
x. Of course not. Rational people could not come to that conclusion. I hope you see that my questions are not trying to justify anything. Keep in mind that I don’t even approve of killing animals by painful means. In my opinion, entertainment is fine, though, as is animal therapy, like using horses and dolphins with autistic kids. (Seems like you were against that use, but I’m not positive.)
“Humans recognize the cruelty of cannibalism, rape, murder… despite the fact that these behaviours can be witnessed in the wild among other species. “
x. Of course we can, but you’re merely rephrasing my question, not answering it. Fine, we recognize the cruelty of such things, but on what basis? Why should there be a different standard for humans and for monkeys, given the belief that “we as transhumanists (shouldn’t) define personhood along species lines.”
“Additionally, unlike lions, tigers, polar bears and many other animals whose choice is between survival and starvation- we humans can easily choose not to kill. “
x. That is true. I just don’t see how “can easily choose not to kill” necessarily implies “ought not kill.” (I’m talking about for food and clothing, not for sport.) However, your statement is well-taken. I might even go vegetarian one day…
I actually *do* believe that there are farms where animals are treated “nicely” before slaughter. I once spoke to a woman on a train to Denmark who spoke of how she lovingly cared for the animals she eventually slaughtered. So, yes, they exist.
But, the key word here is “slaughtered”. Is the animal any less dead because it was treated “nicely” before it was killed? Why would treating them well - although it would certainly improve their actual *lives* - make it then *ok* to slaughter them?
So, of course, I wouldn’t eat meat from that very, “nice” farm - that would be morally and logically inconsistent according to my personal ethics.
Being a vegan is not so hard nowadays considering the wealth of wonderful options we have. There is no need to make it into some all or nothing decision. Simply eat less. According to the UN, it is the number one thing you could possibly do for the environment…. meat consumption contributes even more to climate change than driving your car does.
http://embraceunity.com/?p=43
Seriously, If you aren’t into preparing elaborate dishes yourself, just go buy a bunch of food from brands like Amy’s and you will quickly realize that eating vegan/vegetarian can be truly appetizing. I eat tons of mexican food, indian food, pizza, falafels, pasta, you name it.
Thanks, “EmbraceUnity.” Actually, I already do what you’re suggesting. I almost never eat meat at home and really enjoy Amy’s vegetarian meals, among others. Although I eat out a lot, I have cut down my meat consumption there to only once or twice a week. I now eat far less meat than when I was younger. My biggest weakness probably is for dairy products: eggs, cheese, milk, and ice cream.
Hi Mike… You say - That you like the taste of meat and “even though I know it’s not necessarily a healthy choice and that the animals I’m consuming may have suffered (and obviously did die) before reaching my plate…”
Forgive me for being a stickler for words - but it’s important here - The idea that “food” animals “die”... This concept rather than the truth of animals are “killed” keeps us locked into a mindset which refuses to acknowledge the full truth of it. It is a way of inner denial - of things we’d rather not know.
Have you tried this approach to veganism? Eliminating animal products from one meal… say breakfast first - Do this for a few weeks. Once you see you are still healthy, happy and functioning - Add lunch to your vegan diet - Do that for a month or two and then add your dinner menu after that. It really isn’t that hard, especially when you consider all the benefits of doing such.
There’s lots of support out there on forums, blogs, etc. that also include incredible recipes. Good luck!
Considering that dairy cows produce about 3 gallons per day, the average expected suffering caused from every glass of milk is quite low compared to, say, a steak.
This article makes the argument that milk is far less bad than eggs. Whether this is true or not depends on whether the suffering of cows and chickens are equivalent, and if not, by how much do they differ morally.
I’m not so sure the suffering is equivalent, but I think this essay provides a good basis for making more flexitarian decisions.
A far bigger and even more noble project than the elimination of factory farming is the elimination of the suffering of wild animals and sentient life in general, along the lines of David Pearce’s Hedonistic Imperative.
Thus, it wouldn’t make much sense to waste too much time or money obsessing about factory farming when you could be working toward this goal instead.
IEET Blog |
email list |
newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.
Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT
06106 USA
Email: director @ ieet.org phone:
860-297-2376
IEET Blog