Should you save a dying stranger if you know they eat MEAT? Oxford philosopher controversially argues that it can be ethical to let them die because of the suffering they cause to animals (and he's not even a vegan!)

UK Daily Mail ^ | July 4, 2022 | John Ely

[Billthedrill]

Bertrand Russell would be 150 this year. If I were feeling mean I’d wander over to his grave and read this to him and tell him, “Yo, Bert, this is what they’re doing at the Cambridge philosophy department these days.” Somewhere there would be inconsolable sobbing.

[popdonnelly]

The prof should learn some ethics.

[Peter ODonnell]

I’m surprised there are any Oxford academics left, watching Endeavour around 1965-1972 convinced me that they were going to be extinct by 1990.

Anyway, if a person is making ethical decisions based on the advice of Oxford academics, then they might as well just pick a suggestion out of a hat, they might stand a better chance.

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

Where’s my can of Roundup?

[.44 Special]

Well, if I was from Eton I wouldn’t let him suffer, I’d bloody kill him.

[sten]

let’s turn that around... if we knew a lib was dying, should we bother to help?

[FLT-bird]

Y’all watch. This will be the next thing.

Give it 10-20 years and to radical Leftists, every human being that existed up til then we be a horrible moral cripple and nothing they did in their lives will be of any value at all - and of course they will have been nowhere near as virtuous as the Lefties will be then because they ate meat.

Why if those future Leftists had lived in our time they would have burned down the slaughterhouses and pipe bombed the meat section in every grocery store!....they will say as they practically break their arms patting themselves on the back so hard for their moral superiority.

Then when they’re done virtue signaling about that, the next wave of Leftists will claim owning pets is animal slavery and everybody who ever had a pet was a terrible slavemaster and.....you get the idea.

[sit-rep]

Boggles the mind when sitting back thinking/fantasizing on how to go about fixing our society... The reason I included fantasizing is because one of the only ways I came up with as a viable solution is the implementation of say an Asgardian power beaming these people all up at once and dropping them all off on some uninhibited planet somewhere on the other side of the Galaxy!!

One can only dream!!!

[Clioman]

I’m puzzled. When did revenge become ethical?

[daniel1212]

How dare you expose a “Philosopher of HAPPINESS” at Oxford University for basically teaching that lifeguards/doctors, etc. should not save souls if they eat hot dogs. Which, even if eating meat was wrong, actually presumes omniscience, for the premise that a life should be saved if it will result in some suffering to others presumes you know the future life of the person at issue, as well as ignoring the overall virtuous life such a one overall may lead.

The paradox here is that the philo-sophist has no problem with causing (by neglect) people to suffer if they cause animals to suffer, yet animals themselves will engage in often viscous acts. What this sophist has actually done is to reduce man to the level of such.

I argue that, if meat eating is wrong on animal suffering grounds then, once we consider how much suffering might occur, it starts to seem plausible that saving strangers would be the greater evil than not rescuing them and is, therefore, not required after all. - https://journalofcontroversialideas.org/article/2/2/206/htm

[Carriage Hill]

Here, use mine...