Comments on: oh virtuous schoolwork

By: Matthew Smith

Matthew Smith — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:11:27 +0000

As you can see, I liked it.

By: Eat Apes.

Eat Apes. — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:05:20 +0000

[...] Chappie and myself, though Jon posts a lot more than Chappie). You should probably skip on over to this link and find out why you should eat an [...]

By: Jess

Jess — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 22:35:21 +0000

Bravo Dave. That is what I call a thoughtful thesis. Setting aside the fact that I believe morality is a bunch of who-ha, I think you’ve done a great job with the topic. Now indulge me to go off on a tangent. I do not eat animals. But, like everyone else, I do what I do for completely selfish reasons. I am content and at peace as a vegetarian. I would not be content and at peace if I were starving and could not find vegetable matter to sustain me. Vegetarianism is a luxury (if you’re asking me). I would try to make myself kill and eat and ape or a human if it meant survival. And yes, I would feel bad about it.

PS - My heroes are Jane Goodall and Birute Galdikas.

By: dave

dave — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:38:15 +0000

this is a funny joke. i laughed because it is a joke.

unfortunately, these vegetarians may have actually destroyed the capacity for morality. what if the vegetables woke up from their comatose state? and how are these vegetables kept alive in the first place? no life support, i imagine, so they probably will die from starvation or hypothermia, and in fairly short order. Only after they have died a natural death (because there is nothing the others can do to save them as they’ve been surviving on the water from mountain snow and huddling together as they attempt to keep their self-produced BTU’s) could it be considered morally neutral to eat their remains.

By: Some Other Person

Some Other Person — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 03:53:08 +0000

A chartered plane of vegetarians crash on a remote snow covered mountain top on their way to a convention promoting vegetarianism. Some survive, some die, and some are in a vegetative stae. After several weeks they must choose whether to resort to cannibalism to survive. They face a moral dilemma but in the end reconcile their morals by only eating the “vegetables” among the crash survivors.

By: david

david — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 02:05:53 +0000

next week, hopefully

By: jon

jon — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:12:19 +0000

Exactly. If you don’t read the opening premises closely, you’ll miss the whole thing. Any feedback on this yet?

By: david

david — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:37:55 +0000

i don’t think the argument says “we should eat immoral humans”, it says it is ok to eat beings that do not have the capacity for morality.

if a human is immoral, he still has the capacity for morality, and in fact, may come around and repent or whatever and be a moral person. After all, it is stated as a premise that humans have the capacity for morality. if you kill him, you run the risk of violating the highest ethical good and actually destroy the capacity for morality. This makes a case against capital punishment as well.

If he is already dead, well, he has no life, and therefore definitely has no capacity for morality, so he is a definite non-issue.

By: David's Dad

David's Dad — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:59:59 +0000

So, by extension, if a human is immoral, we should eat him. (Maybe cook him slowly over a low fire first). But, who would want to eat immoral humans but other immoral humans? What a dilemma.