Search lemmy for “vegan reducing harm.” Then search the broad internet for the same thing. You’ll find that this is a common ethos in veganism. I suggest going to the vegan communities (keep in mind you are not welcome in some due to you being a carnist, read the sidebar) and talk to the vegans there. Ask them about harm reduction. You might want to do the debatebro thing, but you might learn more just listening.
Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose
You disagree that this is harm reduction? If it was the elimination of all harm no matter what, this would not be on there. I understand you believe you know more about this than the actual vegans, but you should ask them and listen.
are only two forms of harm. it’s not about harm reduction. it’s about excluding exploitation and cruelty from your personal practice. if this somehow created more net harm, you could still be vegan.
I’ve repeated myself several times already. I refuse to hold your hand anymore. Ask someone else if reducing types of harm as far as is possible and practicable equates to reducing overall harm. I get the feeling you won’t ask in a vegan community because you already know what they would say to you. Drop the debatebro act and you might not get banned. No promises because I consider myself patient and I’ve already lost my patience with you.
Search lemmy for “vegan reducing harm.” Then search the broad internet for the same thing. You’ll find that this is a common ethos in veganism. I suggest going to the vegan communities (keep in mind you are not welcome in some due to you being a carnist, read the sidebar) and talk to the vegans there. Ask them about harm reduction. You might want to do the debatebro thing, but you might learn more just listening.
i’ve read singer. while many are taken in by his utilitarian argument for veganism, veganism predates its utiltarian defense, and is harm-agnostic.
Again, ask vegans. Your comments show a lack of understanding them which is why I suggested this.
even the vegan society’s explanation page never mentions harm. i’m well-read on the theory, and utilitarianism, and you seem to be conflating it.
edit: here
You disagree that this is harm reduction? If it was the elimination of all harm no matter what, this would not be on there. I understand you believe you know more about this than the actual vegans, but you should ask them and listen.
are only two forms of harm. it’s not about harm reduction. it’s about excluding exploitation and cruelty from your personal practice. if this somehow created more net harm, you could still be vegan.
I’ve repeated myself several times already. I refuse to hold your hand anymore. Ask someone else if reducing types of harm as far as is possible and practicable equates to reducing overall harm. I get the feeling you won’t ask in a vegan community because you already know what they would say to you. Drop the debatebro act and you might not get banned. No promises because I consider myself patient and I’ve already lost my patience with you.
have a nice day
but you haven’t listened to what I’m saying once
Disengage.