this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
678 points (97.6% liked)

Science Memes

19458 readers
1613 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AlexLost@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

It isn't morally wrong, it goes against your morals maybe, but that doesn't make it wrong. We are allowed to disagree and you are free to choose the diet you prefer, as are the rest of us.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

Nah, it's morally wrong and if you are honest you will actually agree. Let me explain:

Let's set a moral baseline that we both agree with. Shooting a random person that has done no harm to anyone in the head without their explicit consent is morally bad, yes?

Now, what is different about, say, a pig that makes it less than morally bad to kill the pig? If we then apply that difference to that random human again, is it now less than morally bad to kill them?

The honest answer (and one that I can at least accept) is: there is no such difference.

What is your answer?

[–] AlexLost@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

The pig is food. I will eat the pig. I won't eat the human. The pig isn't indiscriminately murdered, it is slaughtered for food. We as a society still think it is morally right to kill someone convicted of a crime in some places. While I don't agree with that, those states do. If morals can be grey, it's because they are. Morality is a human construct. What's moral today can be immoral tomorrow.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 1 points 9 hours ago

So if someone declares you food, is it now moral for them to slit your throat and butcher you?

[–] hans@feddit.org 0 points 12 hours ago

the "name the trait" argument is so well known vegans just call it "ntt". they're not here in good faith; they think they have a gotcha.

[–] nsrxn@mstdn.social -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

"what is different about a pig that makes it less than morally bad to kill the pig?"

oh, the classic rhetorical trap of "name the trait" which always devolves into a no-true-scotsman. on its face it's purely a spectrum fallacy. the inability to identify a singular trait or even a set of traits that differentiate humans from pigs doesn't change the fact that they are fundamentally different.

please, no one fall for this line of discussion. it's just an exercise in shaming and time-wasting.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 1 points 9 hours ago

"I can't answer this, so it must be a trick."

Ok then.