The ethics of cannibalism

Sandra Murphy33 said:I find it highly suspicious that they’re teaching this at the Faculty of Arts; it immediately makes me wonder if there's some underlying agenda at play. It feels like a calculated attempt to predict a future where we're reduced to cannibalism, serving as one last bit of "civilized" preparation for when things finally fall apart. 😲

Once those major global ecosystems collapse and our temperate zones shrink drastically, green Soylent is definitely going to be the main course for the masses for a good long while.

Steven Clark2 said:The motivation for starting this thread stems from these two specific posts, beginning with a comment from Walnut:

And then there is the response from our colleague:

Aside from the act of murder to obtain food, many people do not believe there is anything inherently unethical about cannibalism itself. So, I would love to hear some thoughts on this topic.🙂

I'm with you on all counts—honestly, I'd even argue that clinging to an ethical taboo against eating human meat in those kinds of survival situations is actually pretty anti-human. But here’s the thing... when I really try to put myself in that hypothetical scenario, my stomach turns just thinking about it. I doubt I'd be able to fight that physical reaction if I were actually stuck in a situation that grim.

Not really trying to steer this debate in any specific direction, just a random observation...

goldenharbor3 said:I'm with you on all counts—honestly, I'd even argue that clinging to an ethical taboo against eating human meat in those kinds of survival situations is actually pretty anti-human. But here’s the thing... when I really try to put myself in that hypothetical scenario, my stomach turns just thinking about it. I doubt I'd be able to fight that physical reaction if I were actually stuck in a situation that grim.

Not really trying to steer this debate in any specific direction, just a random observation...

My stomach turns too, and honestly, I can't fathom any set of circumstances that could ever justify something like that.
It makes me think of that survival story from the plane crash in the Himalayas(?) where the survivors had to wait months to be rescued and ended up eating their deceased companions—their own friends—just to stay alive.
And even though it’s revolting, there’s a certain grim logic to it that makes sense.

But what if the victim gives their consent?

Terry Martinez10 said:My stomach turns too, and honestly, I can't fathom any set of circumstances that could ever justify something like that.
It makes me think of that survival story from the plane crash in the Himalayas(?) where the survivors had to wait months to be rescued and ended up eating their deceased companions—their own friends—just to stay alive.
And even though it’s revolting, there’s a certain grim logic to it that makes sense.

But what if the victim gives their consent?

I don't know about the Himalayas, but a historical case comes to mind involving the Andaman Islands—I think it was a rugby team from South America, maybe Uruguay or Argentina? Pretty sure I saw a movie or a documentary about it once.

To me, the logic behind it is crystal clear, but being rational isn't the only thing at play here... and honestly, it shouldn't be the only factor either.

goldenharbor3 said:I don't know about the Himalayas, but a historical case comes to mind involving the Andaman Islands—I think it was a rugby team from South America, maybe Uruguay or Argentina? Pretty sure I saw a movie or a documentary about it once.

To me, the logic behind it is crystal clear, but being rational isn't the only thing at play here... and honestly, it shouldn't be the only factor either.

Right, yes, the Andes... definitely not the Himalayas.
That’s exactly what I was getting at. Both the film and the documentary were incredibly moving, honestly quite devastating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custom_of_the_sea
http://www.duhaime.org/LawMag/LawArt...ect-Storm.aspx

The whole "drawing straws" thing where shipwrecked sailors pick one person to kill just so they can eat—it’s grim.
But honestly? It’s actually been tolerated in practice before.

Maria Wells14 said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custom_of_the_sea
http://www.duhaime.org/LawMag/LawArt...ect-Storm.aspx

The whole "drawing straws" thing where shipwrecked sailors pick one person to kill just so they can eat—it’s grim.
But honestly? It’s actually been tolerated in practice before.

Yeah, you see a scenario like that played out in the 2015 film *in The Heart of the Sea*. It’s all about the whaling industry, and they even throw in a cameo for Herman Melville—the guy who actually wrote *Moby Dick*—along with some nods to *Robinson Crusoe*, though it feels a bit like one of those tired, overused post-postmodernist tropes you see everywhere lately. Still, if you can look past that, the movie isn't half bad.

Uh... I’d say we’ve officially crossed the line into "unjustifiable" territory here.
They went about it that way because they wanted to dodge a murder charge, but honestly, killing someone in such a specific, calculated manner requires a certain kind of psyche... it isn't exactly something just anyone can pull off, is it?

Terry Martinez10 said:My stomach turns too, and honestly, I can't fathom any set of circumstances that could ever justify something like that.
It makes me think of that survival story from the plane crash in the Himalayas(?) where the survivors had to wait months to be rescued and ended up eating their deceased companions—their own friends—just to stay alive.
And even though it’s revolting, there’s a certain grim logic to it that makes sense.

But what if the victim gives their consent?

Please, don't even go there. 😁 It is highly unlikely that modern-day cannibals would envision their actions this way, yet here we are witnessing the reality of it.

Terry Martinez10 said:My stomach turns too, and honestly, I can't fathom any set of circumstances that could ever justify something like that.
It makes me think of that survival story from the plane crash in the Himalayas(?) where the survivors had to wait months to be rescued and ended up eating their deceased companions—their own friends—just to stay alive.
And even though it’s revolting, there’s a certain grim logic to it that makes sense.

But what if the victim gives their consent?

Andy is involved here. They didn't simply decide to start consuming their frozen friends as if they were grabbing a plate of spaghetti or a slice of pizza; they certainly faced profound moral dilemmas. Some grasped the necessity of it more quickly than others. 😁

Terry Martinez10 said:My stomach turns too, and honestly, I can't fathom any set of circumstances that could ever justify something like that.
It makes me think of that survival story from the plane crash in the Himalayas(?) where the survivors had to wait months to be rescued and ended up eating their deceased companions—their own friends—just to stay alive.
And even though it’s revolting, there’s a certain grim logic to it that makes sense.

But what if the victim gives their consent?

All of us who claim, "I could never do that in a million years..." may eventually find ourselves proven wrong by life itself (I sincerely hope that isn't the case, but one can never be certain...). Perhaps, in those dire moments, the most honest thing to do would actually be to give consent, though I must admit that once I am gone, I wouldn't much care what happens to my remains.