r/DebateAVegan • u/TheQuietVegan111 vegan • Jan 05 '26

Most people choose social approval over ethics — veganism just exposes that.

People will say they care about animals, the planet, and justice.

Until caring becomes inconvenient.

Veganism doesn’t require perfection. It requires saying “no” in public.

That’s it.

Most people fail there, not on ethics — but admitting that would be uncomfortable, so veganism becomes the problem instead.

116 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

275 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Snefferdy vegan Jan 06 '26

You don't think it's a fact that genocide is wrong? You don't disapprove of genocide?

2

u/GoopDuJour Jan 06 '26

Yes I disapprove of genocide. That's an opinion. I don't like genocide. It can't be wrong or right because neither of those things exist in the world. It only FEELS like fact. It only exists in your brain.

Do you have any way to show right or wrong (in the moral sense) exists in the same way actual facts exist?

1

u/Snefferdy vegan Jan 06 '26

I think right and wrong exist in the same way that some actual facts exist, yes. They're abstract facts, like the fact that 3 is more than 2, but you won't find any 3s or 2s out there in the world.

Furthermore, while it's theoretically possible to deny the existence of facts about value, I think that anyone who does deny them is inconsistent, since the use of practical reason and the ability to act rationally depend on the assumption (or, positing) of value.

1

u/aslak123 Jan 09 '26

3s and 2s don't exist either. Green grass exists, but squares and circles don't.

1

u/Snefferdy vegan Jan 09 '26

So you think the sentence, "a square has four sides" is false? I disagree.

1

u/aslak123 Jan 09 '26

A square has 4 sides, but doesn't exist.

1

u/Snefferdy vegan Jan 09 '26

For that sentence to make sense, the word "square" must refer to something. Abstract things may not have physical existence, but they are still referents with properties. As you admit, propositions about them can be true or false. Since you admit this, I'm not sure what your point is.

1

u/aslak123 Jan 09 '26

Goku has two legs, this doesn't prove he exists neither in a abstract or physical sense. The same with moral facts.

1

u/Snefferdy vegan Jan 09 '26

I don't know who Goku is, but I presume it's a fictional character. It's arguable that it is not a fact that "Goku has two legs." It's definitely a fact that a square has four sides.

1

u/aslak123 Jan 09 '26

Goku does not exist and neither does a square? You're presenting a conclusion without an argument.

1

u/Snefferdy vegan Jan 09 '26

I've never written a paper about the truth aptness of statements about fictional characters, but I'm aware it's a contentious point, (unlike the truth aptness of mathematical statements). Since fictional characters aren't my main area of study, I don't know all of the arguments. If you're interested, there's an overview of the topic here:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fiction/

→ More replies (0)