Do you see any logic with this statement?they are lower on the food chain than h

Question:That statement is in regards to whether someone might feel guilty about eating meat. Whether or not they do, or whether it's right or not, is that a logical argument?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: That statement is in regards to whether someone might feel guilty about eating meat. Whether or not they do, or whether it's right or not, is that a logical argument?

No. This is an illogical statement for the simple fact that HUMANS created what is known as the "food chain." Of course, man put himself at the top of it, as an excuse to consume the flesh of other living creatures. Furthermore, if we base the food chain on nature, and we consider our physical capacities (minus the big guns and sharp objects) versus the capacities of animals that actually eat us (lions, maybe?), can we really be at the top? Perhaps we are just at the top of the "brain chain," with our ability to create weapons to destroy the other creatures that share our world and share our need (?) for meat.

LOL! wow.. thats a really really good way to look at eating meat... i like it. so yes, logical.

It works for Mr. Lion.

It's survival of the fittest.

Yeah, well, vegetables are lower on the food chain too, I guess. It has a sort of logic, I suppose and ethics aside, but it could be better-developed.

If we thought in an animalistic fashion, then that would be fine.

But LOGICALLY, no that statement is ridiculous.

It works from a stictly logical standpoint. We are indeed higher on the food chain then the animals that we consume, so it makes perfect sense with the scientific logic that humans are simply animals. Also we do have canine teeth which does mean that we are set up to consume meat in our genetic makeup.

why do you require logic for for that argument?

yes, it is human (or animal) nature for things higer o the food chain to eat the lower ones...especially in our society....chickens and all those otha yummy animals are overbread so they wont go extinct...im sorry if u dotn feel this way...lol..hahaha

sure, is it ok for lions to eat gazelle? or should we tell them that it's icky?

and I'm a pescevegetarian

Yes, it's logical. If they're lower than us, then they are meant to be eaten. That's the way it is- live with it and enjoy your hamburger!!!!

I see some logic to the statement, but not really. It should be our duty to protect the weak, not take advantage of them. Just because something is weaker doesnt mean we should do whatever the hell we want with it. Personally i find the logic distrubing. I think its ok to eat animals as long as they are killed with respect, and we only eat as much as we need, in my opinion. We are different than animals, so what may seem right for animals to do is not always right for humans to do. The food chain works for animals, but humans should be above it, as we are able to survive without meat.

it doesnt fix the fact that they still feel guilty about eating the meet. No it isnt logical because the statement has nothing to do with the question. Regardless if the cow is sub-human, people still may feel guilty; if they feel guilty, they don't want to eat them.

Thats how things work out. A dinosaur or pack of wolves wouldn't feel guilty for eating you. Nothing to argue here.

why do you eat things that are like people are you trying to get nother personality or something

It is logical. Inhabitants of the earth are made that way.

Well, whether we like it or not, carnivores eat herbivores (which would no doubt prefer not to be eaten). And it is biologically impossible to convert lions and tigers (which humans greatly admire) into herbivores, and it would be absurd to try to inspire in them a sense of guilt for their food preferences.

I myself eat meat, and I don't feel guilty about it. If people did not eat meat, they probably would not have had the energy to spread out from Africa to the rest of the world.

Harleigh Kyson Jr.