Anthologica Universe Atlas / Forums / Miscellaneria / Marx articles tracker / <!>Marx articles tracker (2014-05-02 14:47:39)
oh, i mostly had in mind environmentalist/vegetarian type arguments from people who try to make people continue to pattern match the liberal 'all people deserve such and such rights!' and extend it to animals, ecosystems, Cultures, etc.. so eating chickens is bad because chickens are people too. polluting the earth is bad because it harms our precious bhumi gaia mother etc etc etc.
but i also include those weird people on the left, and even a lot of rightist christians, who come up with arguments against abortion on the same level — it's got human DNA, hasn't it? that means it's a PEOPLE.
ne: oh yeah, also like the tumblr multiple-personalities/tulpa people.
nne: OH, and people who treat dogs like they are fully paid-up people, rather than associate members of the personhood club. dogs have many endearing qualities, and it *is* wrong to eat them if you're not absolutely starving, and it is correct to say that what would just be 'harsh treatment' for some animals is cruel [hitting dogs to punish them is fine, i guess, if you're doing it sensibly as a conditioning thing and also rewarding them by giving them lots of pats when they do good, and playing with them lots generally; but just beating them because you are angry at the dog is very bad and not *just* because of virtue ethics type reasons in that it shows you are a bad person, like it does with people who 'torture' flies or w/e], but with the full recognition that they are dogs, and you are not the dog's mummy — the dog's mother is the dog's mother — and that you are falsely ascribing all sorts of psychological notions to them that dogs very likely just do not have.
food animals might be able to become people some day, but not while a) there's no way to make cheap and good artificial meat and b) they keep being made in such big numbers. foetuses probably also require some more magic tech to make it a convincing argument that they are all people.
i don't want to know what it will take to make it sane to have ecosystems etc be people. some sort of neopagan revival, and i cannot see myself thinking this would be as good an idea as the last two.
but i also include those weird people on the left, and even a lot of rightist christians, who come up with arguments against abortion on the same level — it's got human DNA, hasn't it? that means it's a PEOPLE.
ne: oh yeah, also like the tumblr multiple-personalities/tulpa people.
nne: OH, and people who treat dogs like they are fully paid-up people, rather than associate members of the personhood club. dogs have many endearing qualities, and it *is* wrong to eat them if you're not absolutely starving, and it is correct to say that what would just be 'harsh treatment' for some animals is cruel [hitting dogs to punish them is fine, i guess, if you're doing it sensibly as a conditioning thing and also rewarding them by giving them lots of pats when they do good, and playing with them lots generally; but just beating them because you are angry at the dog is very bad and not *just* because of virtue ethics type reasons in that it shows you are a bad person, like it does with people who 'torture' flies or w/e], but with the full recognition that they are dogs, and you are not the dog's mummy — the dog's mother is the dog's mother — and that you are falsely ascribing all sorts of psychological notions to them that dogs very likely just do not have.
food animals might be able to become people some day, but not while a) there's no way to make cheap and good artificial meat and b) they keep being made in such big numbers. foetuses probably also require some more magic tech to make it a convincing argument that they are all people.
i don't want to know what it will take to make it sane to have ecosystems etc be people. some sort of neopagan revival, and i cannot see myself thinking this would be as good an idea as the last two.