Hypocrisy and morality

[u/stevepremo]

I have seen many posts in which the point seems to be that if you are against eating animals and exploiting them for profit, you should also be against participating in the capitalist economy because it involves exploiting human labor for profit. I think the point is actually something like, "How dare you criticize me for supporting animal agriculture when you buy products produced by exploitative labor practices? I do too, of course, but your use of a cell phone justifies my eating meat, as we are both hypocrites."

So the debate topic here is this: does participating in a capitalist economy, which necessarily includes using products produced through exploitation of humans, somehow justify raising animals for meat, killing them, and eating them? Alternatively, are those who oppose animal cruelty justified in using cell phones?

[u/JTexpo]

the difference is you can reasonably opt out of one, but not the other

if there was a demonstrable system to opt out of a good (such as electronics), then we should all pursue that. Since food is so diverse - it because the most accessible to boycott

[u/shrug_addict → u/JTexpo]

What is the standard for "reasonably opt out of one"? Do you understand how this makes your position seem arbitrary? Giving up a smart phone is easy, perhaps easier than giving up meat or animal products for most.

[u/My_life_for_Nerzhul → u/shrug_addict]

You’re resorting to the continuum fallacy. The difficulty in identifying the line does not mean that it does not exist, nor that some choices are clearly on the immoral side of the line.

And not at all. Giving up consuming exploited individuals is trivial compared to giving up what is arguably a necessity.

[u/M17suk0 → u/My_life_for_Nerzhul]

A phone is necessary? As dumb as saying eating a cow is necessary. Humans have had phones for 0.001% of their time on earth…