Quote:
Originally Posted by Spuds
Alright @ Irace86.2.0, lets start over. I'm first going to present a summary of one logical argument in favor of people adopting veganism.
1. Causing unnecessary suffering is amoral.
2. Cruelty to animals causes unnecessary suffering of the animal.
3. Factory meat farms are cruel to animals.
4. Factory meat farms exist because the large demand for meat.
5. Vegans do not add to the demand for meat.
6. Veganism(?) is a morally responsible method of nourishment.
Now, allow me to present a straw man argument.
1. Causing unnecessary suffering is amoral.
2. Cruelty to animals causes unnecessary suffering of the animal.
3. It is cruel to make dogs fight each other for entertainment.
4. The people who engage in dog fighting activities (not air combat) are engaging in an amoral activity.
5. Eating meat is also engaging in an amoral activity.
I can follow the first thread of thinking. I can also argue against each point in that if I choose to. The video basically started with the second thread of thinking. The reason it is a straw man argument is that it links 2 different contexts that have the same root of thought, but circumvents a number of difficult arguments in the first thread with perceptively easier arguments in the other thread. That jump from 4 to 5 has no substance that can be argued. |
Your analysis of his first point is not represented correctly. It went like this:
Antagonist
1. Choosing to eat animals is a personal choice.
2. Personal choices aren't about morals.
3. Personal choices are about desires.
4. I desire to eat meat therefore eating meat is a moral personal choice.
This is false in the A then B context and in the circular reasoning context.
Protagonist...challenges line 2 and 3.
1. Some personal choices are falsely claimed to be personal.
2. It is not a personal choice when a choice involves another creature, especially when that choice involves the suffering of that creature.
3. Choosing to harm a person or dog is immoral because there is suffering.
4. Therefore, choosing to harm a person or dog is not a personal choice.
5. People claim that choosing to eat animals is a personal choice.
6. Eating animals leads to animal suffering.
7. Needless animal suffering is immoral.
8. Therefore, the choice of needlessly eating animals is not a personal choice, and it is immoral.