70
"Plants feel pain" is still a argument in favour of veganism (discuss.tchncs.de)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/vegan@slrpnk.net
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Plants are fed to animals, and then those animals are butchered.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 5 months ago (11 children)

OK, I’ll bite, how is it an argument in favour of veganism, I’m genuinely not seeing it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    You kill 1000 plants, feed 50 animals. Then kill those 50 animals to feed about 10-15 people. If you remove the animals from this equation, you can feed 30-40 people using those 1000 plants. Basically, if people shift to plant based diet, not only you are reducing harm done to animals, but plants too.

    Veganism means you are reduce harm and pain caused to every living being.

    Ps - obviously those numbers and proportions aren't exact, but I am sure I gave you a better perspective.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    If accurate (the idea, not the numbers), that sounds reasonable.

    I'd argue there's much more to it that just calories in/out though.

    Harm reduction should ideally account for as much of the system as possible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    How many insects and small rodents are killed? Also, what about the pesticides that seep into the soil?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 6 points 5 months ago

    Argument still in favour of veganism.

    If we are putting animals as food in the equation, we need more plants, means more insects, rodents etc die too. If we don't rely on animals for food, we don't need as many plants, less rodents, insects die.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Less harm is better than more harm. It's also impossible to walk around without ever stepping on insects, but just because some harm is inevitable that doesn't mean I should walk around and slaughter everything that I can find.

    With a vegan diet (ideally also vegan clothes, cosmetics etc.) you achieve a significant reduction of harm to the planet, animals and also humanity itself (climate warming, pandemics, working conditions etc.).

    That doesn't mean that veganism is 'perfect' in all aspects. Who knows - maybe in the future we'll find ways to produce healthy and delicious food straight out of air and electricity without any involvement of living organisms and thereby further reduce harm. But for the moment doing what we can would be a huge step forward.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    Less harm is better than more harm. It’s also impossible to walk around without ever stepping on insects, but just because some harm is inevitable that doesn’t mean I should walk around and slaughter everything that I can find.

    Agreed, it then becomes a decision about the cost/benefit ratio of how you spend your time/energy trying to reduce harm.

    That doesn’t mean that veganism is ‘perfect’ in all aspects. Who knows - maybe in the future we’ll find ways to produce healthy and delicious food straight out of air and electricity without any involvement of living organisms and thereby further reduce harm. But for the moment doing what we can would be a huge step forward.

    Veganism might not be the maximally effective activity from an ROI point of view.

    I personally see it as a "doing what we can live with" as opposed to "doing what we can", the difference being the impact personal decisions have on the choice of harm reduction activities.

    It's borderline pedantry on the face of it, but the distinction is important for me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    IMHO the harm-ROI for veganism is pretty huge. It's neither super difficult nor costly to become vegan and all the knowledge about food and nutrients that you may learn is a helpful skill in general.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    IMHO the harm-ROI for veganism is pretty huge.

    I believe that you believe that, its also possibly true, I’ve not looked in to it enough to form an actual opinion in it.

    I’m also fairly certain out perspectives on comparative options in this regard is going to be different.

    It’s neither super difficult nor costly to become vegan and all the knowledge about food and nutrients that you may learn is a helpful skill in general.

    This, i've argued against a few times now (in other threads), the level of knowledge and access you have to the things needed for a healthy and sustainable vegan lifestyle are not universal, by any stretch.

    I'm not arguing that it isn't relatively accessible to some, just that the level of ease is very subjective to circumstance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

    You need to kill more plants to feed the cattle you eat than if you just ate the plants.

    Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. But it's never transferred with 100% efficiency, far from it in fact.

    So if *you feel bad about plants dying, stop eating animals and go straight for the plant itself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •