More and more, I feel compelled to do Good in this world.
I’m not talking of giving to charity, although I fully support this gesture. I personally give to Doctors Without Borders and the Canadian Red Cross, because I think their work is critically important in this world, and they do their work not out of religious obligation (both are secular organisations), but because they must as human beings.
But what I’m talking about is a different compulsion. I want to do Good. I want to leave this world, some day hopefully not-too-soon, and feel I’ve made a positive difference. And with each passing year, this compulsion grows in me.
This, I suspect, is years of travel sinking in. I’ve now seen a few parts of the world where people are much less fortunate than I am. More importantly, I’ve begun realizing how my own little world of comfort is constructed on the backs of people who must suffer for my peace of mind. It’s easier to ignore their pleas when you don’t visit them… But I have. And I can no longer ignore them.
You might think this yearning comes from a religious sentiment. You’d be wrong. If anything, my lack of religion is making the urgency of this desire even more pressing. You see, if there is no Divine Plan, if there is no Divine Justice, and rewards in the Afterlife… Then how can we tolerate what we do to each other? If there are no consequences for the exploitation of the poor, for the suffering of millions while the rich ones dine in peace… How can we stand it?
I would argue that the absence of any higher moral authority and justice means the need to do good is greater and more urgent than anything else.
The question is, then, how does one do Good in this world?
Does it suffice to be yourself, and make every decision according to your nature and in accordance with your sense of responsibility? Or do we not have a moral obligation to reach out and improve the world? Is there anything that matters, ultimately, besides lessening the suffering of your fellow human beings, or even, against all hope, contribute to their happiness and well-being?
I don’t know, and it nags at me. And if anyone has part of the answer, I’d love to hear them out.
Posted under Travel by Daniel on 17.12.2008
5 comments »
Yeah yeah, I’m writing about food again. Sorry if you’re expecting commentary about life in Alberta or on making games, but this is what’s on my mind lately.
So in a recent post, I mentioned that I was fine with the moral implications of eating meat. However, I also pointed out that, according to vegetarian wisdom, you cannot truly make a decision about eating meat without first “freeing” yourself from it long enough to clear your judgment.
Fair enough, I say. I’m not convinced of the validity of this argument, but I’m willing to take it for a spin.
And so, starting in January, I’ll become vegetarian for 3 months.
If your immediate reaction to this is to think of arguments against vegetarianism… Please, there’s no need to try and dissuade me. Truth of the matter is, I’ve heard most of them, and I agree with a few. Like I explained in my previous post, I am perfectly fine with eating meat, so I am not doing this because I’ve somehow become convinced it’s the right thing to do.
Back in 2000, after watching The Insider and reading about the 60 Minutes findings that led to the real-life incidents the movie depicts, I made a similar experiment. I quit smoking, initially for 2 weeks, just to truly understand the extend of my addiction at the time. (See, I thought I could “quit anytime I wanted”, so I set out to prove it.) Five days later, having weaned myself cold turkey, I realized I could never go back to being a smoker.
And so, who knows? Maybe I’ll discover that vegetarianism is for me, and will resort to avoiding meat from now on.
Now, one doesn’t simply “become vegetarian”, I found out. There are numerous ramifications to walking down that path. For which branch of vegetarianism should I follow? Wikipedia lists more than 12 varieties of vegetarianism, ranging from the half-assed to the hardcore. Which one is the one for me?
Let’s say, for the sake of the argument, that I were to turn permanently vegetarian today. My reasons for doing so would be:
- Moral opposition to directly harming animals for food
- Moral and ecological opposition to the suffering animals go through when producing animal byproducts (eggs, milk, cheese) in industrial conditions
In other words, I would be opposed to any meat, but willing to accept eggs, milk and cheese if they were produced on a small-scale farms treating animals humanely. For the record, treatment of a chicken in an industrial egg farm is pretty atrocious, but you could argue that a small-scale farm producing eggs can do so in a way that leaves the hen living a pretty content life.
Interestingly enough, my own definition does not correspond to one of the many flavors of vegetarianism. My willing distinction between small-scale agriculture and agro-industrial seems to mark a divide that doesn’t exist in a formalized enough way to make it to Wikipedia.
And so, let me christen my own little brand of vegetarianism “ecovegetarianism”. Pompous word, I know. Here are the tenets of ecovegetarianism:
For the record, I’m currently lacto-ovo vegetarian with agro-industrial products, and non-vegetarian with small-scale, local farms.
Any advice or comments on this? I’d love to hear your thoughts!
Posted under Food by Daniel on 01.12.2008
2 comments »
