tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post3470011239263244976..comments2023-10-14T09:40:06.690-05:00Comments on Jean Kazez: The Case for MeatJean Kazezhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00592593002719828153noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-13560194745590249922012-04-27T07:31:10.235-05:002012-04-27T07:31:10.235-05:00The mannure argument seems like a nonstarter.
Fir...The mannure argument seems like a nonstarter.<br /><br />First, no facts are presented to support the premise that animal manure is necessary for robust human plant food production.<br /><br />Second, even if animal manure was necessary, it is not necessary to kill and eat animals to get manure. It may be more expensive to have manure production where the workers aren't killed and eaten but aMartinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-37621398413646298032012-04-24T12:24:59.483-05:002012-04-24T12:24:59.483-05:00I'm not sure if this "deal" argument...I'm not sure if this "deal" argument works. I might make individual deals with individual animals, but surely, I'm not making a deal with the entire species. And no part of this deal involves them necessarily reproducing. We selectively breed for a reason. <br /><br />So if I don't breed anymore animals, I'm not continuing placing myself in this deal. We choose to Waynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627147979307495870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-17035486316388489522012-04-24T09:48:40.871-05:002012-04-24T09:48:40.871-05:00"Humans are rational and self-aware; so they ..."Humans are rational and self-aware; so they have rights and animals don't; so animals are on the menu."<br /><br />You disparage this view above, but isn't this the "capacities" view that you give at least a partial nod to in your book?Faustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-12015231274603139202012-04-23T08:18:24.633-05:002012-04-23T08:18:24.633-05:00Anonymous--You're right, I didn't explain ...Anonymous--You're right, I didn't explain that well. But even with the clarification, I don't find the idea plausible It's bad to scream at your kids, whether or not it's bad for their lives as a whole. It's bad for me to grade a paper unfairly, even if the student never finds out I did so, and it has no impact on their life as a whole. I would say it's actually Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06297159994901018071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-80593984414654125932012-04-23T02:06:05.726-05:002012-04-23T02:06:05.726-05:00Jean, I agree with you that the manure ones were p...Jean, I agree with you that the manure ones were pretty good. I definitely think one of them will win. But I think you've misunderstood the second entry. You say: "Obviously you can harm someone, even if the harm doesn't mar her life as a whole. No reasonable person thinks that smacks, lies, thefts, broken promises, etc., when delivered to humans, only harm when they harm the victimAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-49319160479904285422012-04-22T18:07:07.703-05:002012-04-22T18:07:07.703-05:00Here's the deal: there is no deal. We impose c...Here's the deal: there is no deal. We impose conditions on already-domesticated animals, and they try to make the best of it. They don't get a choice. The idea that there is some mutual agreement is a convenient myth that we use to comfort ourselves. That's the prime function of any ideology: not, in the first place, something the dominant group uses to pull the wool (or polyester or Aeolushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15772583359516799143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-6530981014308855402012-04-22T15:56:45.279-05:002012-04-22T15:56:45.279-05:00If you're eating vegetables grown in manure, y...If you're eating vegetables grown in manure, your diet depends on meat-eating, even if you don't eat meat. So how could a vegetarian diet be any more ethically defensible than a meat diet? I think this is a good question.<br /><br />But, even if it does require manure that surely doesn't show that raising animals and killing them for food (i.e. at an optimal time for tastiness) is Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-45522915585517794412012-04-22T14:46:08.498-05:002012-04-22T14:46:08.498-05:00I'm not a farmer either... but I'm pretty ...I'm not a farmer either... but I'm pretty sure that nearly all conventional farming is already done without the help of animal manure. If this is the leading argument in favor of eating animals, I would like to see some rigorous fact-checking.hmetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14431479842679216660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-90555104395314080032012-04-22T13:41:19.283-05:002012-04-22T13:41:19.283-05:00Sure, conventional plant agriculture uses chemical...Sure, conventional plant agriculture uses chemical fertilizer. But what if it used nothing but chemical fertilizer--no manure, no fish meal, no ... whatever. Is that perfectly feasible and no problem at all, or would there be problems? I don't know enough about plant farming to answer this question.Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06297159994901018071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8310450667755637519.post-21000894856337815862012-04-22T13:06:24.603-05:002012-04-22T13:06:24.603-05:00Have you heard of the Haber process? We don't ...Have you heard of the Haber process? We don't need animal manure for fertilizer. Most nitrogenous fertilizer is already produced by the Haber process, and it's been estimated that half the the nitrogen in our bodies comes from Haber. The animal shit produced by factory farms does not help us -- quite the opposite. According to Jonathan Safran Foer ("Eating Animals"), animal hmetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14431479842679216660noreply@blogger.com