Vegans kill animals too (Sacredness)

Kendall Clark kendall at monkeyfist.com
Thu Mar 14 12:16:52 PST 2002



>>>>> "thomas" == Thomas Seay <entheogens at yahoo.com> writes:

thomas> --- Kendall Clark <kendall at monkeyfist.com> wrote:

thomas> <<Actually, Singer spends a lot of time showing that life

thomas> itself, per se, is *not* "sacred" or precious>>.

thomas> Well, "sacredness" is not, in my usage, a transcendental

thomas> term. It is an attitude which I choose to adopt.

Fine. But, based on what you say below, I have very little idea about what cognitive content this attitude has for you.

thomas> "higher" purpose than just living. But what about living

thomas> and being...isn't there something sacred about that?

Well, if you mean to say that existing is better than not existing, per se, I'm not sure. In some cases existing is better than not; I'd certainly like to continue doing so. In other cases, people reach other conclusions.

thomas> in spite of his knowlege of human pain, suffering and joy,

thomas> "descends" (or maybe ascends) into the turmoil of being

thomas> alive. That's sacred.

Sorry, that doesn't clarify what you mean, in my view. At any rate, whatever you mean by 'sacred', the view that Singer argues against seems rather different, so it's probably moot.

Best, Kendall Clark



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list