Saturday, 8 November 2008
Carving the Roast Beast -Arto
Eating meat is natural for survival of human. I think that slaughter for eating to maintain life isn’t morally wrong because it is law of nature that is ecosystem; for example, the tiger hunts animals that are weaker than it for survival. Meats are beneficial for health. They have nutrients that are essential for human and give more energy than vegetable but vegetables have some nutrient that meats don’t have, so both meat and vegetable are important for human. I think that consumer can decide independently eat between meat and vegetable. It depends on individual belief and opinion. Although slaughter for survival isn’t morally wrong, we should hunt animal morally. We shouldn’t kill animal that is wild animal, or conservative animal. We should consume animal that breed for food. I think that eating meat isn’t morally wrong because it is one of food for subsistence of human.
2 comments:
Before you click the blue "Publish" button for your first comment on a post, check ✔ the "Notify me" box. You want to know when your classmates contribute to a discussion you have joined.
A thoughtful response should normally mean writing for five to ten minutes. After you state your main idea, some details, explanation, examples or other follow up will help your readers.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Art has picked Aom's idea, but I think extends it. His example of tigers is very good; it makes clear how his idea is not the same as Aom's.
ReplyDeleteHis second opposing argument to Law's main idea is quite different.
Which argument do you think is the stronger? And, again, how might these fit into Law's dialogue? If you were Law, what you do with the ideas the Aom and Art have presented?
I agree because of ecosystem, that slaughter is not immoral. However,any slaughters are still immoral in a sense of human.
ReplyDeleteIf I were Law, I will add both arguments to discuss for an example of different styles on a society that they live in and won't make a conclusion which idea is better.