This websites uses cookies for Google Analytics.

Due to privacy law you cannot use this website without accepting the use of these cookies.

View Privacy Policy

By accepting you give consent to Google Analytics tracking cookies. You can undo this consent by clearing the cookies in your browser.

Who will actually protect animals against eugenics?

Defence of Animals

The eugenics article has shown that eugenics corruption of nature from the perspective of nature. Eugenics moves in the opposite direction as what is fundamentally required for resilience and strength in time.

Regrettably, the fundamental intellectual flaws of eugenics are hard to overcome intellectually, especially when it concerns a practical defense.

woman moral compass

Intellectual Challenge: Wittgenstinian Silence

The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.

Albert Einstein

Perhaps... we must also give up, by principle, the space-time continuum,” he wrote. “It is not unimaginable that human ingenuity will some day find methods which will make it possible to proceed along such a path. At the present time, however, such a program looks like an attempt to breathe in empty space.

Within Western philosophy, the realm beyond space has traditionally been considered a realm beyond physics — the plane of God’s existence in Christian theology.

Whereof one cannot speak

What is the meaning of an insight into the origin and purpose of existence itself, when the insight that language attempts to unlock, cannot be said?

When it concerns the protection of nature against eugenics, the assertion of a moral aspect of which one cannot speak, cannot be easily converted into practical arguments, that can be used to facilitate a defense.

Animal Protectors are Silent

Vegan Forum Eugenics on Animals How many cows are in the field? Just 1 in 180,000 according to genetics! Source: 🥗 Philosophical Vegan

To facilitate an effective defence for animals, one will be required to make strong arguments.

The Wittgenstinian Silence problem is likely the cause that intellectual people who might defend animals, naturally feel inclined to take an intellectual back seat, despite their intuition that eugenics is morally wrong.

Silence is the most appropiate response when one is confronted with a fundamental intellectual inability, combined with the intuition that intellectual strength might be vital for the animals that they care about. From that sense, Wittgenstein was simply right.

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.

Animal Protection Fails

The natural inclination to take an intellectual backseat, caused by the Wittgenstinian Silence problem, isn't understood by most people, and therefore activism against GMO is literally fading away.

While the GMO debate has been percolating for nearly three decades, data indicate it's now over.

[Show sources] American Council on Science and Health Alliance for Science Genetic Literacy Project

Scare Mongering Propaganda

GMO is poison

The Western anti-GMO movement was predominantly driven by the financial interest of the $250 billion USD organic food industry, which indirectly caused a re-enforcement of the fundamental arguments for GMO by scare mongering for GMO based on arguments for human health and food-safety, while the GMO industry directly competes on arguments for human health and food-safety.

This explains that anti-GMO activism faded away. The scare mongering propaganda was a losing battle that was directly fueling the GMO industry.

With a loss caused by the scare mongering propaganda of the organic food industry, an intellectual defense based on aspects of moral meaning whereof one cannot speak, is additionally difficult.


Share your insight and comments with us (info@gmodebate.org).