Tom's words regarding morality and vegetarianism...
Did anyone see that video where he talks about being a scavenger? I thought that was really interesting. Eating meat can be justified in a scenario where you're at a company party where there is a shrimp platter. Its there. It was already purchased. You are just finding dead meat and eating it.
Well, can't that attitude be applied everywhere? The meat at the grocery store was already bought by the store, correct? Its already there. Its already dead. Its now waiting to be sold to the public. If you decide not to buy it, someone else will or no one will and it will be thrown out, meat processed in vain! And as an individual you know your actions have no perceptible impact on the industry- probably no effect at all, there will always be plenty of meat eaters.
No, it cannot be applied everywhere. If there is a causal relationship by you eating some meat to the further increase of profit or slaughtering of animals [btw; meat processed in vain -> loss of profit -> adjustment of quota -> perceptible impact], then it's not scavenging. You buying meat in a store is very much a causal relationship to this. While a single loss of buyer won't practically change much in isolation, it does change things as a small part of something cumulative. For illustration, let's say that if 100 people become vegetarian, one animal will be spared. If it was instead 99, the animal would not be spared. Now tell me, is it the vegetarian number 100 that spared that animal, or was it all of them?
Furthermore, if we're sad about the animal dying and stuff, are we not again making the same mistake of assuming that it had to happen? Doesn't Tom talk about how believing in specific chains of events leading up to the data in the present moment being a mistake of assumed objective reality? We're just rendering packaged meat. We didn't kill anything. Correction: we're rendering the experience of packaged meat. So... where's the moral dilemma? How that meat got there is not apart of your reality unless you find a way to go trace where it comes from and take a measurement - probably impossible - I mean, what would be the point? What's done is done, its too late. Just don't research that stuff. Don't watch those documentaries about factory farms.
Heh, that is one heck of rationalization. How observation and uncertainty relates to the rendering of this reality is completely irrelevant to this subject. If that attitude you describe would be used to make actual decisions, it would be twisting the facts and logic to satisfy ones ego. Self-delusion is no excuse.
I think this is one of those things where the collective consciousness has to make a decision before it trickles down to the individual, wouldn't you say?
It is never the case. The collective consciousness comes from individual consciousness, not the other way around. Believing so, would seem to be a denial of responsibility, as you give it to some abstract form in your mind.
I read a piece of info somewhere, probably Scientific American, where they are now actually growing meat in labs. How about THAT? No moral dilemmas there, right? No animal. None of that sentience going on. Just plain meat, starting out as cells in a petri dish or something. Anyone see that? I swear to god.
This technology will hopefully soon be perfected, so people can eat meat without any suffering caused.