Hacker News Reader

I don't think lacking life has ever been an argument vegetarians use. Once consciousness emerges, there is an innate desire to remain alive and to be free from suffering. Even if we could give animals a wonderful life in our current capitalist system, and then kill them without their awareness, we'd still need to justify (from a philosophical standpoint) why it would be immoral to do the same with a human animal.

View on HN

> I don't think lacking life has ever been an argument vegetarians use.

That would make sense, since GP said:

> If lacking life is what's cruel, then vegetarianism doesn't really solve that problem.

So if vegetarians used the argument that lacking life is cruel, then vegetarianism would be cruel, right? It makes perfect sense (given GP's point) that they don't use that argument.

You're the third replyer that writes as if they disagree about this while making the same point. I'm wondering if I'm reading this wrong, or if GP edited their comment just before I loaded the page.

The GP implied that vegetarians use the logic "ending life is cruel" as a basis for their stance.

I suppose that argument could be used to justify killing some hermit unbeknownst to them. Most people, however, are connected socially, and killing them would make others suffer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com