Futurism logo


I rarely am wary of “moral” calls from non-governmental organizations (NGOs), especially animal welfare ones, notably PETA.

By PiousPublished 4 years ago 3 min read

I rarely am wary of “moral” calls from non-governmental organizations (NGOs), especially animal welfare ones, notably PETA.

At the end of the 20th century, a vast number of scientists forecasted that the global population would grow to a tipping point when humans would all die of food insecurity/starvation. Many people believed in such a profound forecast. That being said, the actual fact has so far proved it wholly wrong.

Science and technology have so far taken agriculture to a new height. Fertilizers are also there to act as a precursor to vegetables thriving and bigger fruits growth whilst pesticides stave off pests. We have got steel to build 20-acre farms (larger than the government buildings) which produce enough crops (above-mentioned) to raise obese cows, have technology advanced enough to simultaneously bathe millions of pigs, and adopt the technology capable of performing these things exactly to every kilogram of meat delivered.

Human civilization has challenged not only the viewpoints of the most pessimistic but also the planet’s ecosystem structure. They pretty much have become Gods.

Take a look at the data: humans account for only 0.01% of the Earth's total biomass. While 94% of mammals are humans and pets (60% are pets), only 4% are wild animals.

Humans have been in a high attempt to feeding other species.

Nevertheless, since people have had enough food to easily get obese, spending the whole day online Facebook, some even want to abolish the things that have changed the world.

They are so supportive of organic foods that desire to give up on pesticides and fertilizers, yet pay no attention to the fact that pests and natural disasters would drive humanity into dying of starvation.

They want to stop inhumane cage farming practices with cows, pigs, and chickens, turning to vegan food. That being said, the world would then suffer a severe lack of meat. Even vegan food may as well be unavailable (as mentioned in the preceding argument on organic foods).

They wish to cut down on CO2 emission and stop the industrialization process to protect the environment. Then, who would protect us?

They want to protect animals from pharmaceutical experiments, so who is willing to be the experiment trials?

Definitely not them.

Who will guarantee food security for more than 7 billion people?

Definitely not them.

To "cut down on pesticides", "stop mistreating and killing animals" or "stop industrialization to protect the environment" are nowadays all the rage. It is so popular that I couldn’t help but feeling redundant repeating this.

But if we all know it, what’s next? Could this get better if we simply stopped operating that way?

Remember, the world is beyond good and evil. What you should isn’t to choose a side, but to think of if doing something this good, will it breed any evil as a result? If yes, are you doing a good job or bedeviling everything?

The desire to be nice neither makes you a good person nor transforms the world into a better place. In many cases, things only get worse if you are too enthusiastic.

In my understanding, I can clearly explain the following: post-conventional morality (PCM) people have found their universal principles (UMP). , so "I do this because I have to do" it is not emotional, it's based on their UMP system. However, acting under UMP is sometimes contrary to common rules and conventions of society, so in the eyes of pre-convention people will think they are stupid (because PCM people do not benefit but even could get yourself into trouble). In the eyes of those at the convention stage, they will be able to judge PCM's actions as wrong because it breaks social standards, even against the law (like in the famous dilemma example of The man who steals medicine, you study Kohlberg will know this example). And of course, PCM people are a minority, they follow their own values, they are well aware that keeping their UMP can bring bad results for themselves, so they will always accept the price to UMP hold. If there is anything unclear, you can ask more. And how do you understand the post-conventional morality period?

Remember one thing: good and evil have never been the nature of a problem. It varies with trends


About the Creator


All the money in the world can not buy your health!

Enjoyed the story?
Support the Creator.

Subscribe for free to receive all their stories in your feed. You could also pledge your support or give them a one-off tip, letting them know you appreciate their work.

Subscribe For Free

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights


There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

    PiousWritten by Pious

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2024 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.