You seem driven by thresholds, like a good life and especially a good death and you do not seem interested in replacing a life of high suffering with a life of low suffering, just because the life of low suffering is a net negative.
What makes me look like I’m interested in thresholds? Replacing a life of high suffering with a life of low suffering is good. Replacing that same life of high suffering with a life of no suffering is even better.
~
Here I asked you about replacing worse farms with better but still bad farms and your response was that truly good farms are too expensive, ignoring the possibility of farms that are full of suffering, just lower levels of suffering.
I don’t understand how I ignored your point. Could you re-explain?
~
Maybe it is implausible to change how farming is done (though I think you are mistaken about the diversity of practices), but getting people to switch from pork to beef or from chicken to fish seems quite plausible to me.
I’ve strongly considered convincing people to shift away from chicken, eggs, and fish to other forms of meat, given arguments around suffering per kg of meat demanded. This is also why I’m personally a vegetarian and not a vegan.
What makes me look like I’m interested in thresholds? Replacing a life of high suffering with a life of low suffering is good. Replacing that same life of high suffering with a life of no suffering is even better.
~
I don’t understand how I ignored your point. Could you re-explain?
~
I’ve strongly considered convincing people to shift away from chicken, eggs, and fish to other forms of meat, given arguments around suffering per kg of meat demanded. This is also why I’m personally a vegetarian and not a vegan.