Cognitive Dissonance

[buttercup]

Maybe. They do say ignorance is bliss.

But at the end of the day does it matter why there is no dissonance?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you saying is ignorance an excuse? If that's what you're asking, I think that's a tricky one, because in this day and age tons of information is so readily available, just a few clicks away. So I think that sometimes people choose to remain blissfully ignorant, on some level knowing that it they were to look into certain things, they wouldn't like what they find. But again I'm not sure if that's what you were talking about.

 

[Foxfyre]

If it’s not creating issues I’m not sure how it can be a dissonance.

We used to go fishing in SE Alaska every summer. It was a self guided trip. You have to club the salmon on the head to stun them before pulling the hook, taking them out of the net and cutting their gills. It took me a few salmon before I got use to doing it. But on some level I know it’s wrong.

Maybe. I could not do that unless I was starving not because of any ethics but just due to the discomfort I would feel about it. But if it was the difference between life and death for me or somebody else, I could. But looking past my own emotional reaction to things, the clubbing is actually humane as it spares the fish much suffering. But I can understand the discomfort with it.

I think it is not cognitive dissonance but rather making the most ethical/reasonable/constructive or whatever choice between two or more imperfect choices. Sometimes no choice is available to us that we can feel good about.

 

[ding]

But in all fairness, other than Jesus I don't think anyone is always consistent all the time... cognitive dissonance is very common. That doesn't make it right, I'm just saying that we're all guilty of it in some way or another.

No one is all good or all bad. People are more complex than that.

 

[ding]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you saying is ignorance an excuse? If that's what you're asking, I think that's a tricky one, because in this day and age tons of information is so readily available, just a few clicks away. So I think that sometimes people choose to remain blissfully ignorant, on some level knowing that it they were to look into certain things, they wouldn't like what they find. But again I'm not sure if that's what you were talking about.

No. I’m saying if one does not have perfect knowledge (i.e. they are ignorant) then they don’t have the information necessary to trigger a potential dissonance.

I’m not sure I would go so far as saying people are intentionally ignorant. Seems like a slippery slope for judging the person and forming a bias.

 

[ding]

Maybe. I could not do that unless I was starving not because of any ethics but just due to the discomfort I would feel about it. But if it was the difference between life and death for me or somebody else, I could. But looking past my own emotional reaction to things, the clubbing is actually humane as it spares the fish much suffering. But I can understand the discomfort with it.

I think it is not cognitive dissonance but rather making the most ethical/reasonable/constructive or whatever choice between two or more imperfect choices. Sometimes no choice is available to us that we can feel good about.

It’s a slippery slope for sure. Which is why I anchor my beliefs with killing is wrong. Period.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I used to be "afraid" to call myself "vegan." I would just tell people "I don't eat pork." Then beef. Then fowl. Then fish. I never liked the mental image with the term "vegan.". Even now I prefer to just say I follow the example of the apostles and the early church. But now I will say I overwhelmingly agree with PETA. So I guess I have "become one myself."

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Sometimes no choice is available to us that we can feel good about.

You're grasping. You had choices today. You weren't denied good choices. But I don't criticize you. You make mostly good choices.

 

[Foxfyre]

It’s a slippery slope for sure. Which is why I anchor my beliefs with killing is wrong. Period.

And I say murder is wrong. Sometimes killing is the virtuous choice. If the intruder will not retreat when ordered and my person, my children, or others are threatened with bodily harm, I shoot. Not without personal trauma, but without remorse. God willing, I will never need to make that choice. But I know in my heart that pulling the trigger in that case is the moral choice.

Humanely killing of animals can also be the moral choice. When over population is starving or sickening an animal population, hunting can absolutely be the humane solution. Certainly carnivores and omnivores will kill for food and other than humans, none give a flying fig about doing it humanely and most don't. I know it happens but I refuse to watch it live or videos of it happening. That's not cognitive dissonance though. It is a personal choice not to unnecessarily undergo distress over something that is entirely natural and happens whether or not I can stand to watch it. I do not feel it would be right to prevent it from happening.

But would I shoot the animal that is attacking my dog or another human without giving it a second thought? Absolutely. The coyote going after my newborn lambs or calves. Yep. Again choosing the most moral choice between two bad things.

 

[ding]

And I say murder is wrong. Sometimes killing is the virtuous choice. If the intruder will not retreat when ordered and my person, my children, or others are threatened with bodily harm, I shoot. Not without personal trauma, but without remorse. God willing, I will never need to make that choice. But I know in my heart that pulling the trigger in that case is the moral choice.

Rationalizing killing is a slippery slope. It can lead to an erosion of standards. Maybe the best way to describe it would be to see it as the lesser of two evils. That way we never move too far away from the standard.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

And I say murder is wrong. Sometimes killing is the virtuous choice. If the intruder will not retreat when ordered and my person, my children, or others are threatened with bodily harm, I shoot. Not without personal trauma, but without remorse. God willing, I will never need to make that choice. But I know in my heart that pulling the trigger in that case is the moral choice.

Not all killing is murder

The definition of murder is "the taking of an INNOCENT human life"

So if you're going on a hike and a mountain lion is going to attack you, and you kill it in self defense, no one will condemn you.

But that's not a CHOICE you made today, is it?

 

[buttercup]

Humanely killing of animals can also be the moral choice. When over population is starving or sickening an animal population, hunting can absolutely be the humane solution.

Not when it's unnecessary.

A lot of people think that hunting can be "moral" when there's a supposed overpopulation of certain animals, but what many people don't realize is that in many cases an animal population is artificially boosted to increase recreational hunting opportunities for hunters.

Furthermore, even if that wasn't the case, killing is not the answer. There are other ways to deal with certain problems that don't involve killing.

We (mankind) were given one job. To rule and take care of the animals as representatives of God, which means according to GOD's perfect will, not our own. God's perfect will is crystal clear both in Genesis 1 and in the prophetic scriptures about the future Kingdom, when God restores that initial paradise that was HIS intent for creation in the first place. Peace and harmony, not exploitation, cruelty, needless violence and killing.

We have not only failed at that one job we were given, but we have done pretty much the exact opposite, to the point of being humanity's greatest shame, imo.

Certainly carnivores and omnivores will kill for food and other than humans, none give a flying fig about doing it humanely and most don't. I know it happens but I refuse to watch it live or videos of it happening. That's not cognitive dissonance though. It is a personal choice not to unnecessarily undergo distress over something that is entirely natural and happens whether or not I can stand to watch it. I do not feel it would be right to prevent it from happening.

What animals do should not be an excuse for our behavior. Some animals also rape and eat poop, that doesn't make it right for us. Also, carnivores like lions don't have a choice. We do. Meat is not necessary for humans. In fact, as was stated before, a diet high in animal flesh is linked to cancer, heart disease and other preventable illnesses. We were never meant to eat corpses, to eat death and violence.

But would I shoot the animal that is attacking my dog or another human without giving it a second thought? Absolutely. The coyote going after my newborn lambs or calves. Yep. Again choosing the most moral choice between two bad things.

That's a different matter. As someone already said, self-defense is not the same thing as murder or needless killing. Self-defense is justified. I don't believe that needlessly killing a sentient being who wants to live just as much as you and I do is ethically justified.

 

[sparky]

factory farming since it is inherently cruel by necessity.

unethical farming practices

Yet there are other instances where birds and animals are raised in abhorrent conditions, have their young taken away, and who are killed in unspeakable ways, who do not receive a public outcry.

. If a person doesn't know what happened before those eggs got to their plate, then of course there's no cognitive dissonance, because in their mind there's nothing wrong with i

It’s a slippery slope for sure.

Humanely killing of animals can also be the moral choice.

Rationalizing killing is a slippery slope

So what is a farmboy like me to do?

On one hand, i've seen the life leave countless human eyes , despite my best efforts (trust me, it lives in your head)

On the other hand , i raise , slaughter , and consume livestock

Any advice on the slippery cognitive ethical part of that?

~S~

 

[Carl in Michigan]

So what is a farmboy like me to do?

On one hand, i've seen the life leave countless human eyes , despite my best efforts (trust me, it lives in your head)

On the other hand , i raise , slaughter , and consume livestock

Any advice on the slippery cognitive ethical part of that?

~S~

Don't ask if you don't want to know
Matthew 19:16-....

 

[Foxfyre]

Rationalizing killing is a slippery slope. It can lead to an erosion of standards. Maybe the best way to describe it would be to see it as the lesser of two evils. That way we never move too far away from the standard.

But my point is I don't always see it as evil. Would you not put down a suffering animal to end its suffering that would continue if you didn't? Would you not shoot the rabid dog or protect yourself or loved ones from something that intended to kill you or others?

This is not rationalizing. It is certainly not cognitive dissonance. This is making a deliberate choice that needs to be made even though there is no satisfying outcome.

 

[ding]

So what is a farmboy like me to do?

On one hand, i've seen the life leave countless human eyes , despite my best efforts (trust me, it lives in your head)

On the other hand , i raise , slaughter , and consume livestock

Any advice on the slippery cognitive ethical part of that?

~S~

As always seek guidance through self reflection, seek wise counsel if needed and let your conscience be your guide. What other advice can there be?

 

[sparky]

Don't ask if you don't want to know
Matthew 19:16-....

have i got this right?>>>>

Context Summary. Matthew 19:16–30 describes Jesus' conversation with a wealthy young man who asks how to attain eternal life. Jesus begins by establishing a standard of goodness, suggesting the man keep all the commandments. When the man says he has done this, Jesus suggests he give up his wealth to follow Him.

~S~

 

[Foxfyre]

You're grasping. You had choices today. You weren't denied good choices. But I don't criticize you. You make mostly good choices.

I'm sorry. There is usually a better choice. But there is not always a good choice.

 

[ding]

have i got this right?>>>>

Context Summary. Matthew 19:16–30 describes Jesus' conversation with a wealthy young man who asks how to attain eternal life. Jesus begins by establishing a standard of goodness, suggesting the man keep all the commandments. When the man says he has done this, Jesus suggests he give up his wealth to follow Him.

~S~

Apparently the bar for commitment is quite high.

 

[sparky]

self reflection

My animals probably live & eat better than i do Ding

I've taken many apart , but to be honest pulling the trigger is the hardest part

~S~

 

[ding]

I'm sorry. There is usually a better choice. But there is not always a good choice.

That's life.