• commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    veganism eschews all exploitation. there is no carve out for consent in the vegan society’s definition

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s implicit. If consent was given, it wouldn’t be exploitative. (And obviously, that’s contingent upon non-coersion.)

            • enkers@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              An astute observation. Good thing I get all my knowledge from dictionaries so I can have a paper thin understanding of everything.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                to be clear, dictionaries record the most common uses of terms. consulting a philosophy encyclopedia is not a good way to understand a term as it is used in vulgar vernacular.

                • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  If we we’re having a discussion about physics, presumably we would use the terminology of physics. If we are having a discussion about morality and ethics (fields of philosophy, that is) we should probably use the terminology of philosophy. If you want to play semantic games, play them by yourself.

                  Veganism is an ethical position and as such can only be properly understood in the context of ethics.

                  • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    if the vegan society wants to create an additional carve-out for consensual exploitation in addition to its exceptions for practicability and possibility, it’s not as though they are unaware of these concepts. they have not done so, and there is no reason to believe they mean to do so.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            three mentions across 2 paragraphs. all of the mentions imply that consent would somehow relieve accusations of exploitation, but that isn’t established in your article for a certainty, and at best i’d say it’s debatable. i don’t care to debate about it. it’s clear that the vulgar use of the term is unrelated entirely.

            • enkers@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Your assertion was that consent isn’t at all relevant to veganism in regards to exploitation. However, if there exist situations in which consent could relieve the existence of exploitation then it must be relevant to consider.

              Also, not that it matters, but there are 10 mentions if you also search for “consensual”, but that’s not really here nor there.

              If you don’t wish to debate, you’re free to not respond at any time.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Your assertion was that consent isn’t at all relevant to veganism in regards to exploitation. However, if there exist situations in which consent could relieve the existence of exploitation then it must be relevant to consider.

                it’s not clear that the vegan society would allow for any exploitation, consensual or otherwise, and to the extent that sometimes people consent to being exploited, there is no reason to believe that exploitation ceases to exist in those cases.