Monday, April 17, 2006

Jason (Busy, Busy, Busy) is back with a scathing indictment of PETA.

3 comments:

W.M. Bear said...

His basic fallcious logic is this:

Abuse A (human torture) is worse than Abuse B (animal abuse) -- which is at least arguably true -- THEREFORE, stop protesting Abuse B and focus exclusively on Abuse A. No. Protesting Abuse A OR Abuse B are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Those who have not studied formal logic typically have trouble with the distinction between the "Inclusive logical OR" (A or B or BOTH) which obtains in this case and the "Exclusive logical OR" (A or B but NOT both) which does NOT obtain in this case. Political conservatives, in fact, love this kind of what I like to call "dislogic" and use it to support many similar postions.

Mac said...

I agree with both of you. I think PETA's antics are in dire need of revision. I think *protest itself* is is need of revision.

You're correct that fighting animal abuse and fighting human abuse aren't mutually exclusive; I personally consider them two sides of the same coin. We live in a world of unthinkable violence; could we perhaps help our own species by redefining our relationship with others?

Jason argues that humans should come first, that until human abuse is brought under some semblance of control efforts to "save the chicken" are secondary. One could just as easily argue that coming to the aid of the animals we so casually butcher could serve as a step in confronting our innate tendency toward violence.

But ultimately this is probably too trite. I think human and animal cruelty are symptomatic of one another.

The least we can do is boycott fast-food restaurants. All of them. They're all vile, unnecessary and incredibly damaging. I'm not going to try to convince people that meat is murder; but for heaven's sake, *think* before you bite into that hamburger!

W.M. Bear said...

The least we can do is boycott fast-food restaurants. All of them. They're all vile, unnecessary and incredibly damaging. I'm not going to try to convince people that meat is murder; but for heaven's sake, *think* before you bite into that hamburger!

You know, I actually do this. I had my "Burger King moment" several years ago, when an especially greasy (but tasty, it's true) Whopper stayed with me in a highly perceptible way for several weeks. Since that time, I really have sworn off of fast food entirely and even eat at real restaurants only VERY occasionally, and then only for corporate lunches at which attendance is basically required. I've also discovered that this policy is healthier not only digestively but also for avoiding communicable diseases.

BTW, I think that funky protests (like the chicken suit) can actually show a lot of imagination and even be a "fun" way to attract attention to a cause. I mean, the forces of evil push marketing tactics to the hilt in their pursuit of an illicit buck. Why shouldn't "we" do the same thing in pursuit of more morally legitimate motives?