I think this kind of Bayesian reasoning, starting with priors, is a lot more useful for estimating probabilities of objective truths. It seems like a misuse to apply it to morality, as we see here.
Perhaps the overwhelming popularity of their position (eating animals or at least eating animal products) leads to a lack of incentives in providing philosophical papers and arguments in favor. When you’ve got 99% of humanity what is the incentive to argue?
I haven’t really “read the literature” but I have thought about it in some detail. Because I think most factory farming is terrible and if I could stop it by going vegetarian I would. But I know that I can’t so it doesn’t make sense to me shoulder the costs when there are no benefits to anyone. I don’t feel particularly guilty over it because I believe it is a government failure, not an individual one. People want animals treated humanely and have expressed this preference, over and over. But corporations lie and hide information and the government lets them get away with it. The point of the government is to solve similar common good type problems!
I don’t think predator or omnivore animals are immoral. And while I certainly hold humans to different standards in some ways I have trouble seeing why, as we are animals, it is immoral for us to eat other animals.
I think this kind of Bayesian reasoning, starting with priors, is a lot more useful for estimating probabilities of objective truths. It seems like a misuse to apply it to morality, as we see here.
Perhaps the overwhelming popularity of their position (eating animals or at least eating animal products) leads to a lack of incentives in providing philosophical papers and arguments in favor. When you’ve got 99% of humanity what is the incentive to argue?
I haven’t really “read the literature” but I have thought about it in some detail. Because I think most factory farming is terrible and if I could stop it by going vegetarian I would. But I know that I can’t so it doesn’t make sense to me shoulder the costs when there are no benefits to anyone. I don’t feel particularly guilty over it because I believe it is a government failure, not an individual one. People want animals treated humanely and have expressed this preference, over and over. But corporations lie and hide information and the government lets them get away with it. The point of the government is to solve similar common good type problems!
I don’t think predator or omnivore animals are immoral. And while I certainly hold humans to different standards in some ways I have trouble seeing why, as we are animals, it is immoral for us to eat other animals.