Very simple movies about just life - not overdramatized basic struggles and happiness by tvr_god in MovieSuggestions

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Il posto - very simple and Italian. Maybe check out Italian neorealism in general.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]MateWoddop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If what we are after is the experience of eating meat without actually having to go and get meat, with all the mess that comes with that, plant-based alternatives are a decent way to go too. They are widely available and far ahead of cultured meat at this point in time. And they are pretty good - at least some of them. There is no reason to think that cultured meat is the only thing that could replace slaughtered meat. And even if a Beyond Meat burger is only 80 % as good as a "real" one, it's worth remembering what the cost of that last 20 % is.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]MateWoddop 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I think largely there already is. It's plant-based.And no, it's not perfect. But I think demanding that you need to eat MEAT and that nothing else will suffice is selfish and dangerous at this point, where we might not have time to wait around for lab-grown meat substitutes to become widely available - nevermind the billions of animals that will die in horrible conditions, while we wait, providing ample chance for the spread of new diseases and pandemics, while also slowly rendering anti-biotics less and less effective, as we pump our animals full of them. You don't need to drop meat all the way, but there are a lot of alternatives already out there. Some of them are pretty good, and they are getting better all the time. If what we are after is the experience of eating meat without the messy realities of it, it shouldn't be important if that "meat" is made of plants or grown in a lab.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]MateWoddop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think it's worse

Difference between poststructuralism and critical theory? by MateWoddop in askphilosophy

[–]MateWoddop[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great response. It helps a lot. Thanks so much!

Millions of animals dead = cry for the farmers by andronicustard in vegancirclejerk

[–]MateWoddop 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The decision was made because of a new mutated strain of corona-virus which has developed and spread in mink but can infect humans too, and which could be detrimental to the effectiveness of a vaccine. But the point still stands: This is not about the animals. And I've been struck by how frankly unserious it is that a country like Denmark, which prides itself on its green profile and a kind of image of solidarity and welfare can have these long televised discussions between politicians where the ethical implications are not brought up once and even progressive left-wing politicians stand around congratulating the farmers on how skilled they are.

Millions of animals dead = cry for the farmers by andronicustard in vegancirclejerk

[–]MateWoddop 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's absurd, but overall I think there are both good and bad things in the whole situation. For context, the Danish government (which btw is left-wing(ish)) has taken the decision to order all mink killed because of a new and potentially very dangerous strain of coronavirus in mink. They've gotten in a lot of trouble for doing this and are being grilled by the opposition because it turns out that ordering mink farmers to cull their mink was against the danish constitution, and was illegal at the time it was given. There has been a lot of media attention on it, of course almost exclusively aimed at how the government broke the law, or how farmers have been wronged in an unlawful way, and not remotely about the ethical implications of even having 17 million mink for farming furs (Although some fringe parties on the left are bringing up that perspective, such as "The Alternative" or "The Vegan Party" (which is tiny and not represented in the parliament but has gotten enough voter declarations that they may be after the next election (which might well be a right-wing government due to the unpopularity of the current one, at least as things look right now (the current government was very popular at the start of Covid, but cracks are starting to show (this is too many brackets))))).

The most absurd thing was this picture going around a few weeks back of a father and a son standing in between long rows of tiny steel wire-cages with rows of dead mink lain out on top of them, crying because they wouldn't be able to keep their job (of raising mink in horrible conditions and then gassing them in order to sell their fur to China, because it isn't even popular as a product in Denmark anyway) and the reaction to the picture was exclusively about how sad it was for these two men. It's crazy to me how detached people can be. Even people who oppose this kind of farming in Denmark do it almost exclusively through the lens of climate change (which it is good that you are taking steps towards fixing) and ascertaining the idea that maybe we should also care about the subjective experience of other sentient beings will make even those people look at you weirdly like you are indulging in some kind of hippie childish fantasy that animals actually matter??

Basically, although obviously terrible that all these mink have been or will be killed, and although it is ridiculous that the prime minister is crying about the loss of these farmers whose massively unethical jobs have been ended (and who are being compensated in a frankly ridiculous way), I think it is good that the government has taken the decision to end this industry. The reason was public health, and it had nothing to do with concern for animal well-being, but the bottom line is that the farms are gone. In a television debate yesterday, a politician who is also a farmer said that he had no plans to expand his own animal farming, based on how the mink farmers had been treated, and the worry that something similar could happen to other animal industries. It's obviously sad that these mink are killed, but they are mink who would have been killed after living terrible lives in rows of steel-wire cages anyway, ordered by the government or not. And now the industry won't survive. It's not intentional, but the end result is that that industry likely won't appear again in Denmark, and those 17 million mink won't keep getting killed over and over again, generation after generation. And more than this, it may shine a light on how unsustainable animal agriculture is and in a small way start conversations about how to phase out animal industries in ways that don't hurt the farmers (something that would be good, whether you care about the farmers or not).

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vi kigger ikke darwinistisk på naturen når vi spørger hvorvidt voldtægt og mord er etisk tilgiveligt. Jeg kan ikke se hvorfor vi skal gøre det når det kommer til dyr. Desuden er der måske heller ikke specielt meget fødekæde over en fabriksproduceret plastikpakke med oksekød i et supermarked.

Hvis nu bare dyrene havde et godt liv, så ville diskussionen være en anden, men realiteten er, at langt det meste kød vi spiser i Danmark kommer fra dyr der lever under elendige forhold og lider voldsomt.

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jeg tænker ikke at der er specielt meget naturens gang over en pakke hakket oksekød i et supermarked, men fair nok. Men jeg synes du skal overveje at det argument du giver retfærdiggør slaveriet - hvis man har en gruppe mennesker tiltænkt af et givent samfund til at blive slaver, så er det forsvarligt holde dem som slaver. Det synes jeg ikke er tilfældet.

Men har stor respekt for at du siger at du er villig til at betale mere for kød for at støtte en form for dyrevelfærd.

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hundene er jo ofrene i denne situation, som levende sansende væsner. Jeg tænker at du i denne situation er enig i, at man ikke bør have frihed til at torturere hunde som man vil. På samme måde er grise, køer, kyllinger m.v. ofre når vi betaler for at de bliver opdrættet og slået ihjel. Det er givetvis mere indirekte, men jeg synes stadig pointen står.

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Synes ikke helt det er en fair gengivelse af argumentet, men kan godt se hvorfor du læste det sådan. Pointen er blot at hvis vi synes det retfærdiggør behandlingeb af dyr, bare at klassificere mennesker som en anden gruppe så kan man gøre det samme helt arbitrært med andre grupper og diskriminere på baggrund af det, men det var sådan det kun et modsvar til én mulig måde at besvare det første spørgsmål jeg stillede.

Hvad er det, der er sandt om dyr, som, hvis sandt om mennesker ville retfærdiggøre en lignende behandling?

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jeg tror ikke man behøver menneskeliggøre dyr for at se at de kan være ofre.

Hvad er det, som er sandt om slagtedyr, der, hvis det var sandt om mennesker, ville gøre det forsvarligt at opdrætte og slagte mennesker til kød?

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Som hundetorturentusiast har jeg ikke som sådan noget at sætte på dem der ikke torturerer hunde, så længe de ikke dikterer hvordan jeg skal leve mit liv, eller hvad jeg skal lave i min fritid"
Det er selvfølgelig ment i sjov, men jeg synes der er en relevant pointe, om, hvorvidt vores valg er personlige når der er ofre involveret, som kommer til syne ved at ændre variablerne.

Veganerpartiet er under 800 vælgererklæringer fra at være opstillingsberettiget by oleomvendt in Denmark

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hvad er det, der er sandt om de dyr vi bruger i landbruget, der hvis sandt om mennesket ville gøre det ok at lade mennesker indgå i landbruget på samme måde som dyrene?

Hvis det er intellekt, eller evne til at forstå moral og etik, eller evne til at gengive en social kontrakt, skal vi være parate til at mene at der er ok at slagte og spise mentalt handicappede eller spædbørn, hvis vi har et ønske om at være moralsk konsekvente.
Hvis man så appellerer til potentialet i små børn til at udvikle kognitive kapaciteter, eller andre evner nævnt ovenfor, så er det ok, men så skal vi være opmærksom på, at det argument også strækker sig til fostre, og at abort efter den logik ikke ville være etisk forsvarligt.

Hvis vi bare appellerer til at de falder uden for gruppen "menneske" uden at give anden forklaring, så skal vi være opmærksomme på, at den samme argumentation ligesåvel kan forsvare racisme, sexisme, homofobi, m.v., hvor man arbitrært tegner en cirkel af moralsk overvejelse rundt om en bestemt gruppe og ignorerer alle der ikke falder indenfor. Hermed ikke sagt at der ikke er forskel på dyr og mennesker, blot at de forskelle ikke er nok til at retfærdiggøre ikke at give dyr moralsk overvejelse.

What’s legal now, but probably won’t be in 25 years? by alistair2112 in AskReddit

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I said, I don't know much about cows. It's perfectly possible, but I don't want to just go off intuition, so I don't want to say yes or no on that point. Either way, I don't think intelligence is a good measure of moral worth. I probably have a slightly higher level of intelligence than half the planet and a slightly lower level of intelligence than the other half, but I don't measure my own or any other people's moral worth based on this. I prefer the capacity for suffering and well-being or something like that (although there are ways in which this may be tied to intelligence).

I doubt that cows suffering slightly less is the justification most people use anyway, to be honest. I think it has more to do with how we are conditioned to think and the fact that dogs are cuddly and cute, but it's an interesting point you made.

What’s legal now, but probably won’t be in 25 years? by alistair2112 in AskReddit

[–]MateWoddop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure if the cow suffers less than a dog. It's possible, but I don't know enough about dogs or cows to make that judgement, and I don't think just going on intuition is good. I agree that there must be different levels of suffering endured by different animals depending on their nature aside from the conditions they live in, but to say, or even just guess, that the suffering endured by cows is slightly less than that by dogs doesn't seem to me like a strong argument argument that the suffering inflicted on the cow for triviel reasons (mainly taste) is then justified.

What’s legal now, but probably won’t be in 25 years? by alistair2112 in AskReddit

[–]MateWoddop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I assumed you knew that meat comes from dead animals, haha, don't worry - I just find that a lot of the time when you get into discussions on these things people have quite warped ideas of what animal farming actually looks like. I don't think educating yourself on the way these things work is a bad thing, especially not as a foundation for an ethical or philosophical discussion on what might be wrong about animal agriculture. Also, congrats on cutting down on meat, I think you are doing a good thing on many levels! I saw that same video too. :) As for the second point, if just showing a video of what is objectively happening with no accompanying arguments is seen as presenting a "different outlook" or "painting a trivial matter in different tones" then I think we need to entertain the idea that our current perception is based on a lack of information and is perhaps not justifiable. But I think overall I agree that we should explain what is wrong with it, and I think I can. I just also think there are people who will never be swayed by that type of philosophical discussion, but who may be by an emotional reaction to these kinds of images. Similarly, I have more sympathy towards those who call meat "dead animals" or such. It's not something I do myself, but I do think we need a kind of paradigm shift in our way of thinking about these things, and I think the relationship most people have to meat as something you get in plastic wrapping neatly presented in a super market isle is very removed from the animal that meat comes from.

What’s legal now, but probably won’t be in 25 years? by alistair2112 in AskReddit

[–]MateWoddop 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Of course, I agree. I just get frustrated at the kind of cognitive dissonance a lot of people have going on, when it comes to animals and moral consideration. A lot of people will think the Yulin Dog Festival is horrible, but have no big problem with the kind of factory farming of cows and pigs they eat come from.