If you enjoyed this video, maybe check out some of my others: - Why I Stopped Idolising David Attenborough: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Cv9ftiEvSpA.html - How to Solve Wild Animal Suffering: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cp1qpzXe2Yw.html - Earthling Ed, We Need to Talk: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zG6TNgFGRck.html
@HumaneHancock I am 100% confident that insects, let alone DUST MITES, do not have any conscience experiences or feelings whatsoever, let alone the sentience required to actually feel pain. Quite frankly, with making such an extraordinary claims, I am baffled by the fact that you don’t even TRY to provide the extraordinary evidence needed to back them up. The fact is all of the research that we CURRENTLY have are either inconclusive or negative evidence on insects/other arthropods being able to experience pain, let alone anything else. If you want to dispute all of that research than that is perfectly fine of course, but you need to show some DAMN good research SUPPORTING your arguments for insects and mites being sentient creatures if you want to do so in an honest way. Which, at least in this video, it just doesn’t seem that you even TRIED to do. You just came up with a bunch of absurd hypothetical scenarios about “WhAt If PeOpLe WeRe AnTs” and just left it at that. And, well, if YOU were born in 1902, than you wouldn’t even BE making any of these videos in the first place. So I guess we’re at a stalemate than, as far as absurd hypothetical scenarios go that don’t even matter to begin with!
I often find myself struggling to comprehend the extent of animal suffering at the hands of humans. But what I struggle to reconcile with the most, is not the cruelty itself, but that the perpetrators themselves aren't evil. The fact that everyone around you, including your family and friends, are engaging in something so heinous is chilling
I really can't fathom that either. I have friends who are the sweetest people but I talk to them about animals and they just carry on paying to have them tortured and killed. Its insane how evil we are to animals and people just don't bat an eye
@@jamesjohnson2394 I try to tell myself that I was like them once, but sometimes people's apathy and ignorance make me lose faith in the general goodness of people. And I'm someone who struggled to find the good in people before I went vegan 😅
Very interesting and I'm looking forward to hearing about the moral blind spots. I work for a rescue where we're saving dogs and cats but they serve dead animals at lunches.
This is such a great video, good job! I'm also currently working on a video on the moral circle, but it'll be quite different. I really loved your approach and you should perhaps even upload the alien sketch separetely on your channel or as a short/tiktok!
This is such an incredible video, my friend. Since I last viewed your channel, you've come along way - very thought provoking, well put together. Thanks!
Great video Jack, fair play to you lad lets keep that hopefully ever expanding moral circle growing strong. Looking forward your follow up views on moral blind spots.🌱🧠💚🌅
17:37 It's not "weird"; it's performative activism. I save bugs too. I always carry sugar water to feed weak bugs. I don't pull out my phone and film while someone is suffering. I just save them ASAP.
I think you also are an outlier in this respect (and it's good that you are!). Most people care much less than people like you or Brian. As to the video being "performative" - well, the video is made for the audience and not the bug (motivations for this can be self-promotion, or to make the audience think/feel about insects, or both). He did let the ant struggle for longer than it would have done if he had helped it right away and not made the video. The ant made it out in the end, and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have let it drown.
If I were born at the time of slavery with my character now, I would have been like I am now with what we do to nonhuman animals now, outraged but accepting of how little I can do to change things, just because I do not want to be harmed. Only gaining confidence to oppose immorality when knowing there is a sizeable enough minority to force change, is how most people are, we rely on individuals to do what we would not no matter how morally wrong something is.
Damn, I discovered your channel this week and loved this video until you offended me with the last part about the French (I am French). Lol I'm joking about being offended haha. I wish you could do more videos because I find them very interesting (but I'm sure they require a lot of time and effort considering the content they provide and the deep philosophical questions). You are really well-spoken and you provided me with food for thoughts about the possibly ever-expanding nature of the moral circle of humanity.
Trying to judge who I am, and bow people view me, I think I would have been a German who would have condemned the Holocaust and possibly fled Germany, but I have no grand delusion that I would have 100% fought in the resistance (maybe I would have? No idea). The part that saddens me is that I might have been okay with slavery growing up in the 1800's if I had been convinced that blacks were a different species / more primate. I (probably) wouldn't have been okay with abusing them since I abhor animal abuse... but we also never really know how we would act in a different time and place. Maybe I would have been a slave whipper, and that is what keeps me always trying to question my morality and ethics today.
Lol, 1 minute in: "Would you support genocide? Would you think slavery was ok? Would you think this was the height of fashion?" said as if those are on the same level of immorality, hahaha. Thanks for making me laugh!
This was an interesting video. I will be the first say humans are trash in my opinion and the world would be just fine with out them. yet I like to keep hope alive that we will get better. I got no problem being biased on about people at same if some ones line of thinking is more open than mine that's fine however it dose mean i will change. Mortality and ethics are things we created to justify ourselves in my opinion. Nothing has meaning unless we make it so. However I know that can be dangerous.. keep up the good work.
Not what leviticus says......just saying you shouldnt use orhers words to justify your morality especially if they have been reweitten as to miscontrew their original meaning
Especially in C period you saw that many people raised their hands back then. I experienced very severe exclusion in Germany just because I didn't take the shot... and everyone acts as if nothing had happened in the last 3 years and one should forgive. Most people obey the mass media, which is beyond frightening. We can say the same about the consumption of animal products. Great video!
Well, taking the shot for everyone who could was an act of expanding your moral circle of consideration for vulnerable members of your society (apart of for yourself). If you could and didn't, I would also look badly on you
@@RawVeganAthleteAndreas my friend, most of my country has got the shot, multiple times. I think any serious side effects would have become visible by now
@@sergior. They are visible. Plenty of real world data surfacing. The point is: Its ok for "them" to lose their jobs, rights to commerce, rights to travel and rights to freedom of speech and be looked down apon becauae "They" are morally inferior. "We" are morally superior so its ok for "us" to mistreat "you". In other words: if you didnt comply, you're outside the morality circle.
I'm presuming that if the ant didn't make it out by itself he would have done so. (And that he didn't do so at once because he wanted to make the video.)
Christianity is the axiological antecedent of all egalitarian ideologies. Marxism is derived from Christian ethics, specifically the doctrine of soul equality; the innate value and intrinsic worth of all who bear a human (or semi-human) countenance. Wokeness is Marxism with a shift in focus from economics (as conventionally understood) to culture, race, and sex. While ostensibly concerned with the welfare of the working class, that is merely a superficial garnish. In genetic terms, Marxism is the revolt of spiteful mutants against civilization. The Left is a coalition of genetic refuse, as Professor Dutton has emphasised repeatedly. It always has been, but the recent waves of woke insanity have made this more obvious than ever. If germs and parasites were sentient, I imagine they would express anger at being identified for what they are and purged by the host's immune system. Similarly, the woke mob are angry when they are identified as a threat by healthy, sane people. It is unsurprising, then, that a disease vector would think itself harmless and assert that the true pathology is our healthy immune response against it. Spandrell's bioleninism thesis is the best analysis out there, by far. In short, the egalitarian Left is quantity and the hereditarian Right is quality. Healthy human behaviours, like ethnocentrism and aversion to abnormal things like homosexuality and the transgender cult, have been pathologised as “racism” and “phobia” by Christian ethics and the atheist liberals (secular creationists) who, though they disavow institutional Christianity, are still running the Christian software that Western man has internalised over the past two millennia. It has been entrenched in Western culture for so long that many people regard egalitarian values and human rights as self-evident truths. Over the course of 2000 years, it became axiomatic in the Western mind. Nietzsche was the first to make the connection and denounce Christian slave morality as the original psych-op, but many conservatives and reactionaries who oppose wokeness still don't understand that Christianity is where the egalitarian poison comes from. It has always been a Trojan horse for introducing Levantine malware into the European mind. It inverted the values of classical civilization, which would have been an immense task in a time before mass communication. Unless we successfully extract the Christian cancer in its entirety, we will never traverse the psychological Rubicon. Christianity is the nemesis of the hereditarian, eugenic, meritocratic Right, because soul equality is antithetical to evolution, a merciless process of elimination. Because evolution is synonymous with life itself, Darwinian explanations for our behaviour are indeed the primary explanations. It should never be forgotten that life is nothing more than a ruthless gladiatorial tournament of genes. The Nazis were the abandonment of Christian ethics and the revaluation of all values that Nietzsche prophesied. Some people wonder why, despite having a considerably higher death toll, communism is not reviled like Nazism. The reason is because communism is not a departure from Christian axiology; it deifies the lower classes and demonises the strong. “The last shall be first, and the first shall be last.” It is Darwinism in reverse. Racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. are moral indictments based in Christian ethics (soul equality). It has no bearing on the brutal Darwinian reality, which has no obligation to be pleasant. Humans are animals, men and women are evolutionarily divergent, and ethnocentrism is adaptive and healthy. Egalitarian ideology has pathologised these things, as it pathologises everything normal, because the Left is a coalition of individuals with high mutational load. Junk DNA, or what we now call “spiteful mutants.” The Nazis were an immune response to the unparalleled degeneracy and debauchery of the Weimar era, which bears an astonishing similarity to the current woke insanity. Indeed, the woke mutants today revere disgusting perverts like Hirschfeld. Same pathology, same nefarious group of people responsible for it, and if we could only abandon Christian ethics, the same uncompromising reaction against it. Perhaps now the gears will start to turn in normie brains. Perhaps they will start to understand why Hitler fumigated these freaks. They are hostile organisms, and our immune system needs to flush them out like the filthy germs they are. _Christianity's Criminal History_ by Carlheinz Deschner, _The Darkening Age_ by Catherine Nixey, _Dominion_ by Tom Holland, _The Jesus Hoax_ by David Skrbina, and _On the Historicity of Jesus_ by Richard Carrier are invaluable resources. César Tort, a self-described exterminationist, is the foremost authority on the Christian psych-op. Two seminal texts, _Judea vs Rome_ and _Why The White Man Must Abandon Christianity_ by Ferdinand Bardamu, are available on his site. My own essay _On the Aetiology of Wokeness_ is now nearing completion. If all of this literature, and the combined scholarship of Kevin MacDonald, Andrew Joyce, Thomas Dalton, Tobias Langdon and Brenton Sanderson, ever becomes public knowledge, it will be catastrophic for world Jewry.
I agree: it is disrespectful to compare the animal holocaust to human holocausts. What humans go through pales into comparison to what our species does to others animals.
My main issue with veganism (and my main issue with anything for that matter) is the presupposition of right and wrong. No noble savage has ever been found and this is not an appeal to nature or anything like that, we just do not have objective morality. Back to veganism. here you have a group of people that preach their moral doctrine to everyone, same as christian or mormon missionaries. We all have met one of those in our lives, aren't they annoying? (doesn't mean that they are objectively annoying) I feel the same about veganism, it is just a philosophy that says "we've got the answers to everything" and then just doesn't expand on why. Same as christian zealots or orthodox jews. You all (vegans) like to act like you are morally superior, truth of the matter is that you aren't any more relevant than say a neo nazi or a mennonite. Just other snake oil type philosophies destined to parasitize the weak willed.
Anyone here who believes Computers (and further down the road „AI“) can suffer and hence deserve moral consideration?Better think critical about that notion and about what suffering really (biologically) means, because otherwise we as humanity might enroll for the golden highway to the enslavement and extinction of our own species (aka „big filter“).
I wanna buy a camera install Final Cut Pro and start a RU-vid channel just to break down how many times you were wrong in this video. Quite impressive since you tried really hard to imply a lot of things and say nothing directly but don't worry you were still wrong.
Yes, it's ok, Jack doesn't really believe that French people don't deserve moral consideration. I assume that that's what you are referring to. So it's OK.
Alright, so on top of EVERYTHING ELSE if I become vegan I have to *checks notes* be against the biodiversity and conservation of ecosystems because veganism is a totally coherent ideology that makes a lot of sense which is why so many people love being a part of it. I guess. But I think that I’ll still hold off of becoming a vegan for a while myself. Nothing personal, I just don’t understand. . . . . .any of this utterly bizarre nonsense. Much less why I’m morally obligated to be a part of it!
I think you missed the point of the video, but I assume you are at least somewhat interested because you're here commenting. So I'll just prompt; why cause suffering when you don't need* to?
The point was that, even after the character was confronted with the animal suffering caused by fishing and factory farming, as soon as the conversation turned to wild animals, he only saw them as part of an ecosystem. He didn't think of wild animals as individuals who could experience extreme suffering in nature. That said, many vegans don't care about wild animal suffering. Others believe that conservation is more important than wild animal suffering. Veganism isn't one single moral ideology that every vegan has to agree with. A vegan is simply someone who doesn't consume or purchase animal products.
