As it turns out, I actually do think eating animals is approximately 1/1000th as bad as killing people.
I don’t go around shooting people, a) it’s a clear net loss to create a world where people kill for all their pet causes, b) it’s pretty obvious that when you’re trying to change a policy affecting the entire world, killing people will almost only hurt your cause.
“Don’t kill people” is a pretty obvious moral schelling point that everyone can agree on.
It’s dramatically less clear where lines are drawn with regards to emotional manipulation. The entire human experience is basically based around emotional manipulation (storytelling, fashion, advertisements, literature, tribal excitement at sporting events). Refraining from doing that won’t cause the rest of humanity to stop, unless you’re actively coordinating with people on a campaign to stop emotional manipulation.
So I’m not sure why I’d refrain from doing that, whatever my pet cause, unless my pet cause was removing emotional manipulation from humanity completely.
“Don’t kill people” is a pretty obvious moral schelling point that everyone can agree on.
So is “don’t inflict suffering”. At least some part of what people consider bad about killing is that it can be painful or that it causes sadness in others.
I find it interesting that when it comes to eating animals, people usually focus on killing, even though most veg*ans I know care primarily about preventing suffering.
I know zero people who would be capable of meeting that standard. On the other hand, “don’t kill people” is pretty easy. Schelling points are about actual behavior, not professed behavior.
As it turns out, I actually do think eating animals is approximately 1/1000th as bad as killing people.
I don’t go around shooting people, a) it’s a clear net loss to create a world where people kill for all their pet causes, b) it’s pretty obvious that when you’re trying to change a policy affecting the entire world, killing people will almost only hurt your cause.
“Don’t kill people” is a pretty obvious moral schelling point that everyone can agree on.
It’s dramatically less clear where lines are drawn with regards to emotional manipulation. The entire human experience is basically based around emotional manipulation (storytelling, fashion, advertisements, literature, tribal excitement at sporting events). Refraining from doing that won’t cause the rest of humanity to stop, unless you’re actively coordinating with people on a campaign to stop emotional manipulation.
So I’m not sure why I’d refrain from doing that, whatever my pet cause, unless my pet cause was removing emotional manipulation from humanity completely.
So is “don’t inflict suffering”. At least some part of what people consider bad about killing is that it can be painful or that it causes sadness in others.
I find it interesting that when it comes to eating animals, people usually focus on killing, even though most veg*ans I know care primarily about preventing suffering.
I know zero people who would be capable of meeting that standard. On the other hand, “don’t kill people” is pretty easy. Schelling points are about actual behavior, not professed behavior.
Oh, thanks for pointing that out! In that case my example was indeed the opposite of one.