Originally Posted by Eugene
I would think that the whole point of advocating a moral baseline is that it would be a demarcation which would be clearly delineated. If it is something subjective, and we each get to decide for ourselves where it is, then it wouldn't be much of a moral baseline.
I think it's clear enough in the sense that he's distinguishing between veganism and lacto ovo vegetarianism or so called ethical eaters (locavores, humane slaughter advocates, free range advocates). That's the point he's trying to make. And note that veganism is the moral baseline is for animal rights. You can't talk about rights and think that it's okay to kill animals (either factory raised or "free range") or buy animal products like dairy or eggs. Both of these are in contradiction with a basic definition of rights and so veganism is the only sensible stance. Yes, there is some debate among vegans about some of the details of a vegan lifestyle, but to focus on them too much would cause us to miss the point, which is distinguishing between veganism and other approaches animal advocates might take.
Originally Posted by SkepticalVegan
yeah i think veganism as a moral baseline is flawed. I also dont think it should be a "baseline", veganism is not a value in itself, its a means to expresses our values (such as autonomy for other sentient life or reduction of suffer depending on ur philosophical approach)
Veganism might be a good rule in terms of rule utilitarianism (depending on how its practiced), but its by no means a universal baseline.
Yeah, that's an interesting point. I'd like to know why explicitly you consider it to be flawed, but to me it's a principle that's highly contextualized. There's nothing fundamentally unethical about eating an egg or a carcass (say, if one stumbled upon a carcass in the woods). I don't have ethical objections to freeganism or to a woman I know who has several rescue hens and eats the eggs they produce. And yet, these things are incompatible with veganism and so veganism exists as a kind of protest in a culture where animal abuse is a commodity. I think a lot of ethical vegans would have trouble damning certain non-intrusive forms of animal use and resort to consequentialist arguments about "sending the wrong message".