A legislative move to ban the consumption of dog meat is losing steam as rival parties have yet to reach a consensus over the issue amid fierce opposition from dog meat traders.
trying to prevent suffering might be laudable but i don’t think indifference in this respect is immoral.
edit, i read too fast. i missed that you were asking about causing ME, A PERSON suffering. yea. you should be cognizant of that and avoid it when you can.
I think being indifferent to the suffering you cause on those around you is a moral failing. You said yourself you aim to treat people how you want to be treated, do you not care if those around you inflict suffering on you? I don’t see how indifference to suffering can be universalised.
Edit: didn’t see your edit before posting, I still don’t think you’ve justified why the unnecessary killing/causing suffering of a person and animal are different. Your argument seems very circular on this, killing humans and animals are different because they are different.
i explained that my feelings on this were born out of the categorical imperative. i also hedged that, saying that im leaning lately toward virtue ethics rather than deontology, so i’m not really settled on my position at the moment.
Do you think we shouldn’t try to minimise unnecessary suffering?
i think minimizing unnecessary suffering is probably a moral good, but not a moral duty.
Why not? If actions I take cause you suffering, shouldn’t I try my best to prevent that?
trying to prevent suffering might be laudable but i don’t think indifference in this respect is immoral.
edit, i read too fast. i missed that you were asking about causing ME, A PERSON suffering. yea. you should be cognizant of that and avoid it when you can.
I think being indifferent to the suffering you cause on those around you is a moral failing. You said yourself you aim to treat people how you want to be treated, do you not care if those around you inflict suffering on you? I don’t see how indifference to suffering can be universalised.
Edit: didn’t see your edit before posting, I still don’t think you’ve justified why the unnecessary killing/causing suffering of a person and animal are different. Your argument seems very circular on this, killing humans and animals are different because they are different.
i explained that my feelings on this were born out of the categorical imperative. i also hedged that, saying that im leaning lately toward virtue ethics rather than deontology, so i’m not really settled on my position at the moment.