hi

[aba4w]

Hi

I'm vegan for 4 years by now, and just want to learn more about good arguments and how to win debates, both using logic and rhetoric

I struggle a bit with utilitarian vs deontic reasoning for ethical decisions
The way I see it the world is pretty fucked up, especially using the former as a guideline for moral behavior. Effective altruism being a good example. On the other hand deontic reasoning also doesn't seem very satisfying. Maybe virtue ethics?

Currently I'm also interested in making my diet as cheap as possible. Thinking about buying a pressure cooker for beans and make seitan and tempeh myself. Also trying to eat more vegetables, maybe I buy a mixer for that. I try to get rid of processed food. I don't buy oat milk anymore as especially the supplemented ones tend to be expensive. I just take chap calcium citrate powder for my calcium intake
Still need to think more how to be sure I get enough iron. Also cheap ways to get my B12

[Red]

Hey aba, welcome to the forum.
Here the consensus is consequentialism, particularly altruistic consequentialism (effective altruism is a big part of that). We can discuss the various differences between each ethical school in a new thread if you'd like.

There are plenty of sources of iron on a Vegan diet, legumes are always viable, as are nuts and seeds, and leafy greens. As for B12, just take a quick supplement every couple days, they're dirt cheap.

Feel free to start threads on any questions you have and we'll be glad to answer them.

[aba4w]

Hey Red, thank you! Yeah would be interested in discussing consequentialism further and how it affects veganism
what subforum would be best to discuss this?

[brimstoneSalad]

Virtue ethics can be a form of rule consequentialism, you may want to look into the latter. That's generally the best way of looking at consequentialism because most people are capable of employing flawed case by case reasoning to justify whatever they want even if that reasoning is logically inconsistent and based on information we should know is bad.

For instance, many consequentialists may attempt to justify meat eating by arguing about the higher price of vegan alternatives or how they'd suffer without meat and try to minimize harm to animals by diminishing their levels of sentience or cherry picking other facts.
But as a rule, we should act in accordance with how the world should become and err on the side of harm avoidance where it's possible without trying to over-analyze the cost and benefit. This rule actually does make sense if you understand basic economics and psychology, but you have to have some not insignificant knowledge in those areas (not just pop knowledge) to correctly apply classical consequentialism and most people simply do not have that understanding -- and so those people will tend to employ cognitive errors and wishconceptions to do harm and justify it under a twisted version of consequentialism.

[aba4w]

I opened a new thread here
viewtopic.php?t=8119
Hope it's ok that I quoted you

[brimstoneSalad]

I opened a new thread here
http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?t=8119
Hope it's ok that I quoted you

Yes, that's absolutely fine. I'll check it out.