Difference between revisions of "No Ethical Consumption Under Capitalism"
From Philosophical Vegan Wiki
(Created page with "The argument that there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism, and that as such buying a veggie burger is equivalent in wrongness to buying a beef burger is...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The argument that there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism, and that as such buying a veggie burger is equivalent in wrongness to buying a beef burger is a common argument among anti-capitalist meat eaters against going vegan. | The argument that there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism, and that as such buying a veggie burger is equivalent in wrongness to buying a beef burger is a common argument among anti-capitalist meat eaters against going vegan. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This argument draws from one of two major logical fallacies: | ||
| + | |||
| + | == False Equivalence == | ||
| + | |||
| + | A false equivalence is often drawn from mistakes such as denying the role of [[Individual Responsibility]] in a system where multiple parties are at play in harm. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Appeal To Futility == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Just because it's impossible to avoid all wrong (futility) doesn't mean we have no duty to lessen harm. Any difference in harm between two options creates a moral imperative to choose the less harmful one. | ||
Revision as of 22:29, 21 May 2020
The argument that there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism, and that as such buying a veggie burger is equivalent in wrongness to buying a beef burger is a common argument among anti-capitalist meat eaters against going vegan.
This argument draws from one of two major logical fallacies:
False Equivalence
A false equivalence is often drawn from mistakes such as denying the role of Individual Responsibility in a system where multiple parties are at play in harm.
Appeal To Futility
Just because it's impossible to avoid all wrong (futility) doesn't mean we have no duty to lessen harm. Any difference in harm between two options creates a moral imperative to choose the less harmful one.
