I have a couple of half-baked writings on language and compassion. I get what you are saying, but at the same time, if I analyze it too much, I get caught in a circle of reasoning.
Compassion means to have sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others. Why would you have this? Because causing suffering to others is wrong. If it is wrong, it is a moral issue. Given that it is a moral issue, we can be involved in the realm of justice. Why care about justice? Because we have compassion for those who suffer.
I'm searching for the best framing of the issue. Granted, most people we causally chat with on the street aren't going this academic on the subject!
I quite enjoyed this. I also think emotional appeals dont work for a lot of people. But I also think a certain type of person who is fixated on compassion/empathy does tend to see social justice as an emotional/moral appeal, and this is revealed in their politics and arguments.
I do agree that people love to hate vegans though, unprompted and absolutely refuse to give up meat or even consider it as a valuable action to take.
I really like the idea of using words such as unjust which may encourage insightful conversations and comparisons of injustices in our history.
However, I wouldn’t rule out the term compassion. I would argue that love and compassion are in many ways interchangeable. I see compassion as love but with action- the deep sense of caring we have for one another. Compassion immediately makes me think introspectively and ask myself, where do I draw that line? Who can I extend this compassion to. Why? Why not? etc. I think unjust is an incredible addition to the conversion/framework when responding to people. Compassion to me is almost like asking someone ‘how do you show love’, or ‘what is it that you do to share that love’.
Ultimately, I think any form of language that invites people to the table or perhaps sparks curiosity can be a strong framework for veganism and ultimately a non-violent lifestyle 🤗
I agree with this. If we think of the origins of veganism and the idea of Ahimsa (do no harm), then it was about personal choice of Not being part of doing harm to any sentient being, and that includes humans. Few of us were born vegan, most of us started with small steps and compassion was most likely a huge part of this decision.
I’ve just started reading Plant Powered Persuasion by Emma Schwarz which is actually a very encouraging book with clear ideas on how to communicate well with non-vegans and increase our chance on inspiring others to join.
It's not one or the other. I think that to set them in opposition to each other is not helpful. Compassion is normally a prerequisite for the effective work of reason. We are all familiar with people who are impervious to reasoned argument about the rights of animals -- e.g., they are all over Facebook. Here's my review of a book that addresses this issue.
I have a couple of half-baked writings on language and compassion. I get what you are saying, but at the same time, if I analyze it too much, I get caught in a circle of reasoning.
Compassion means to have sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others. Why would you have this? Because causing suffering to others is wrong. If it is wrong, it is a moral issue. Given that it is a moral issue, we can be involved in the realm of justice. Why care about justice? Because we have compassion for those who suffer.
I'm searching for the best framing of the issue. Granted, most people we causally chat with on the street aren't going this academic on the subject!
I quite enjoyed this. I also think emotional appeals dont work for a lot of people. But I also think a certain type of person who is fixated on compassion/empathy does tend to see social justice as an emotional/moral appeal, and this is revealed in their politics and arguments.
I do agree that people love to hate vegans though, unprompted and absolutely refuse to give up meat or even consider it as a valuable action to take.
This was great!
Never thought about it this way, very interesting read Natalie.
I really like the idea of using words such as unjust which may encourage insightful conversations and comparisons of injustices in our history.
However, I wouldn’t rule out the term compassion. I would argue that love and compassion are in many ways interchangeable. I see compassion as love but with action- the deep sense of caring we have for one another. Compassion immediately makes me think introspectively and ask myself, where do I draw that line? Who can I extend this compassion to. Why? Why not? etc. I think unjust is an incredible addition to the conversion/framework when responding to people. Compassion to me is almost like asking someone ‘how do you show love’, or ‘what is it that you do to share that love’.
Ultimately, I think any form of language that invites people to the table or perhaps sparks curiosity can be a strong framework for veganism and ultimately a non-violent lifestyle 🤗
I agree with this. If we think of the origins of veganism and the idea of Ahimsa (do no harm), then it was about personal choice of Not being part of doing harm to any sentient being, and that includes humans. Few of us were born vegan, most of us started with small steps and compassion was most likely a huge part of this decision.
I’ve just started reading Plant Powered Persuasion by Emma Schwarz which is actually a very encouraging book with clear ideas on how to communicate well with non-vegans and increase our chance on inspiring others to join.
I will definitely look into this book! Thanks for sharing 🤗
It's not one or the other. I think that to set them in opposition to each other is not helpful. Compassion is normally a prerequisite for the effective work of reason. We are all familiar with people who are impervious to reasoned argument about the rights of animals -- e.g., they are all over Facebook. Here's my review of a book that addresses this issue.
https://www.academia.edu/19718818/Review_of_Paola_Cavalieris_The_Death_of_the_Animal