Uploaded: 10 years ago
Views: 3,025
File size: 152.66 KiB
MIME Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Comments: 20
Favorites: 17
Another short one. This time featuring Shelny, whom we've seen several times before.
The title is shamelessly borrowed from Australian philosopher / ethicist Peter Singer, as is the gist of some of the things mentioned here. The impetus for this short story was me wondering what this type of discussion might look like in Felarya, and also to delve slightly more into Shelny's mindset.
Fear not, I'll soon be back to writing some nice, simple, healthy vore! ;)
Please login to post a comment.
Posted by newenglandee 10 years ago Report
I will give you incredible points for doing something I have never, ever, EVER seen ANYONE do. Actually address morals and ethics in Felarya. I've never seen it done once. At all. Not even remotely debated. Mostly because the argument boils down to for most of the predators to be "Durrrr I'm just hungry, so that's the end of that".
Here's my issue with settings like that. It's one thing to NEED to eat meat. I GET it. But you should seek out alternative nourishment to avoid causing unnecessary suffering, and people are not foodstuffs. You might argue that a wolf isn't evil for eating sheep. No, but a wolf is a dumb animal doing what instinct tells him, and he can't make moral decisions. People CAN. That's what separates them from animals. So creatures in most vore settings, Felarya included, shouldn't eat people if they're sentient themselves, they should be eating things like at actual restaurants, or cows, or fish, or birds, or sheep.
But they CHOOSE to prey upon humans. Why? Because as the centaur said, it feels good. Which I cannot see as anything but sadistic, lazy and reprehensible.
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
That comment came quickly! :p Thanks. Stories addressing ethics are indeed rare in Felarya, but not entirely unheard of. In his long comic "Silver Scales", NickInAmerica has his character (Remus) delve into a moral argument with Milly, to try to persuade her that her pleasure in eating humans is not worth the suffering it causes. He makes similar points towards other predators.
Ravana3k's character Jade does not eat humans (or any other sapient beings), and goes out of her way to protect them, but does eat animals. Shelny's position is a little different, as you can see; she's a vegetarian (which is facilitated by the fact that she obtains nourishment from the sun and soil). Her position is one that unconsciously echoes Jeremy Bentham: What matters is not "can it speak" or "can it think" but "can it suffer"? That is the basis of ethics: to avoid causing unnecessary suffering.
Posted by oldman40k2003 10 years ago Report
"Sadistic, lazy, and reprehensible" from our point of view and our ethical standards. From the point of view of a "survival of the strongest" type of ethics, they're doing nothing wrong, and from the point of view of an extreme hedonistic type of ethics, they're doing the right thing.
I think we would see more stories debating ethics if the weaker party could actually defend itself from the stronger party; since they generally can't, there's no way to convince the stronger party that there is a better way.
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
Quite so. There is no deliberate sadism on the part of most Felaryans, since they genuinely do not view eating humans as "sadistic". And they might take offence at being called "lazy", since they spend a large part of each day doing the work of a hunter-gatherer.
From our point of view, what they do is beyond reprehensible. But it simply doesn't occur to them (for all sorts of reasons) to see it that way.
Posted by newenglandee 10 years ago Report
That would be applicable if not for the fact that moral relativism simply allows for atrocities. It's foolish to say all moral systems are equal because not all societies are equal. Truth involves some exclusion. There are only so many ways you can add numbers up to four, only so many ways you can create a chemical compound that produces dynamite. Therefore there are only so many ethical or moral paths that will actually produce genuinely good results. Others just stomp on the rights of others in favor of enhancing the life of a single individual, with is, frankly, selfish. It means that when Middle Eastern cultures stone women and you speak up to say that's wrong, they will immediately use the "Don't push your beliefs on ME, jackass" excuse that their way of life is just as good as yours. I think the woman who's brains are leaking out onto the road just now would disagree, compared to how WE deal with adulterers, which is cultural shame, possibly jail time if it involved violence, and getting the label of "slut" or "dog" if it's a guy.
And being a hedonist isn't a good thing. The Viennese Actionists were reminiscent of the Cults of Dionysus and they believed in exemplifying the body and everything that came out of it. They were hedonists because the founder felt such behavior would be a form of regressive and healing therapy...and it involved doing things like rolling a grown man, naked, around in baby powder. So even if you bought into regressive therapy...there's RIGHT ways to do it and WRONG ways to do it.
Also, Pauly Shore's character from "Bio-Dome" is a hedonist. Do you REALLY want a character in your story to ever be compared to Pauly Shore?
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
I'm certainly no fan of moral relativism. I used to be, until a few years ago when I gave it sufficient thought, and considered the practical implications.
On the other hand, I prefer to talk of ethics rather than morality. When people talk of morals, it seems to me they generally mean some sort of transcendent principle or set of rules, which they imagine to be "natural", or divine, or simply to exist beyond us in some vague way. Which is manifestly not the case.
I broadly agree with Sam Harris' view on morality. That some actions cause definite and unjustifiable harm, and are therefore wrong by any sensible definition.
There is, however, a subtle difference between your example and what Felaryans do. (Other than the fact, of course, that one is real and the other fictional! Which I think we shouldn't lose sight of.) When people in some places stone an "adulteress" to death, they believe (wrongly) that theirs is a morally positive act: it is enforcing a code of morality, albeit in a grossly disproportionate and therefore unjustifiable way. By contrast, when a Felaryan swallows a human being, she or he views it as a morally *neutral* act: in their perspective, morality doesn't factor into it *at all*. It does not occur to them that there is a moral issue associated with the act, because (for the most part) their minds have no cause or opportunity to make that leap.
In essence, it's similar to meat-eating in real life. Many people are puzzled when they encounter the idea that there is a moral issue associated with the way that animals are raised and slaughtered, and they try to set that thought aside as quickly as possible. Most of the time, it simply does not occur to them (and when it does, it's too discomforting for them to think about). I see Felaryan mindsets functioning in exactly this way.
Posted by newenglandee 10 years ago Report
What do you know about the fable of the five blind men and the elephant? All of them were feeling an elephants body and we're taking different guesses as to what an elephant was like. All were partly in the right but all were in the wrong. Moral point of views are like that... they can be partly in the right and yet still be in the wrong. You can take the view that there is for example no such thing as gravity but if you fall off a cliff you will die. You can take the view that there's no such thing as climate change despite all the scientific evidence opposing you. Likewise you can take the view that what you're doing is just to feed yourself and that there is no bad ethical thing connotation attached to it but you would still be wrong!
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
Yes; that's my point.
Posted by newenglandee 10 years ago Report
Fair enough. I'm just glad to see a story that's well written and addresses such topics. Because I know plenty of stories that try and fail, and I appreciate the effort, but they don't convey the questioning well or who come to a completely BIZARRE conclusion. And others will just ignore it entirely because they just don't care, and it's not that they're trying to be FUNNY about it, because then I could sort of "get it" in an ironic way...the authors just don't care. Those are the worst kind of stories.
This, though? Definitely going to be one of my favorites.
Posted by mojo-2131285 10 years ago Report
Cool that you're trying new things. I'm always fascinated by the philosophy and psychology behind voraphilia, even in a fictional setting.
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
Thank you! Vore does raise all sorts of issues, which it can be interesting to explore now and then.
Posted by Imrhys 10 years ago Report
Yes, and you have made me think in directions I don't like... because mostly philosophy, ethics, morales... is just one huge confusing soup of gibberish to me. I'm always wrong is all I know and have learned. I blame autism and difficulties with abstract concepts. But you keep on writing, because I'm still enjoying reading ^^
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
Thanks. Sorry for dragging you into confusion. ;) I hope Shelny was able to make a few reasonably clear points here all the same.
Posted by Imrhys 10 years ago Report
Oh yes, clear and quite disturbing points, lol. Thankfully I have a bad memory :))
Posted by Marked 10 years ago Report
A gentle ethics teacher is the best one. I give a big nod to Shelny for meeting those she talks on a level they can communicate on, rather than being an extremist.
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
Thanks for the comment. And yes, it's probably her best hope of being persuasive.
Posted by Shingami 10 years ago Report
don't know about all the ethics and stuff but i just thought this was a very good story
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
Thanks! Ethics in Felarya seemed like an interesting topic to tackle.
Posted by Zontan 10 years ago Report
So I don't actually know anything about the setting this is based in (which took some getting used to because I kept having to adjust everything's scale in my head), but I am very interested in the ethical considerations of vore from the perspective of the predator. Obviously it's easy to just say "it's wrong" from our perspective but it's not really that simple. My only complaint about this story is that it really only showcased one side - since the centaur didn't really have strong opposing convictions to argue, since she'd never even thought about it. Personally, I've had this argument myself in many RPs, but it's always been between predator who wants food and prey who would rather not be food, never between two predators of opposing views.
Posted by French_snack 10 years ago Report
You may enjoy this one, then: http://aryion.com/g4/view/261693 . :) Same principle, but this time both sides have arguments to make.