VeggieBoards banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi, firstly i neither agree or disagree with this. but for the sake of understanding a different perspective, I'm interested to hear the rebuttals to my argument.

i think that "cows as a species benefit as a direct result of us eating them"

let me explain.

In nature, symbiosis is a term for a relationship between 2 species that benefit from each other. There's heaps of examples. Like ants that nurture the young of other insects to like bees that pollenate flowers.

And I'm thinking perhaps the relationship between cows and humans is one of symbiosis. Cows provide us with food, in exchange, we pretty much guarantee that cows won't go extinct.

From a evolutionary standpoint, it's a great deal. I mean, what better evolution ally can you have but with humans? For a beefy, slow moving animal that can't do much except eat grass, cows have done pretty damn well.

Really, they're exploiting us as much we're exploiting them. I could claim that cows are dependent on this relationship. If we didn't eat cows, they may not even exist anymore.

Now I'm not saying cows purposely make themselves tasty - more that evolution is an unconscious, non-directional process driven only by the goal of perpetuating the species in its environmental factors. Most importantly, it's a natural process that encompasses humans and all living species.

This leads me to state that the theory of evolution and the moral grounds supporting vegetarianism directly contradict each other. Whereas vegetarian gives consideration to individual dignity, evolution is purely about survival, and pain is inevitable and ultimately irrelevant.

So what are your views? Is it about the pain of the individual vs the survival of the species or can these views co-exist? My opinion is you can only believe one or the other.
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.