Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Floyd Yeung

Morality on food waste

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

As i believed most of us agree that food waste is immoral

But i am a little bit confused here

If we have to finish all the food we consumed, what about food that is unhealthy? For instance, the soup from noodle, they are totally edible but because it contains msg or sth really salty, we usually have to flush them away

Or bread crumbs that fell to the bag, but because of our habits, most of us wont eat it, so technically we did waste those soup and crumbs, but are they considered it as immoral?

 

Edited by Floyd Yeung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To begin at the beginning, I don't understand what you mean by "immoral". My limited but still extensive observation of the O-web tells me that it means "with the permission of the Objectivist authorities" - Rand, Peikoff and (to some tastes but not others) Nathaniel and Barbara Branden. As far as I know, none of the deities has ever pronounced on the question. An independent, heroic, scrupulously rational person would conclude from this that we do not have that permission and that only a hatred-eaten mystic would feel free to waste food. An intellectual thug, by contrast, might believe that what is what is not explicitly forbidden is permitted and would thus accept the rule-of-thumb "when in doubt, throw it out". Which are you?

(Side question: what do you mean by "waste"? Does it mean throwing food away? I should think that this is just the right course of action with food that is perishable and that you don't want.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checking, but Floyd Yeung, are you familiar with what the philosophy of Objectivism is about? I ask because, in addition to this being your very first post here, the idea that "wasting food is immoral" is actually more of a belief of people from a very different set of ideas than the ones this forum is dedicated to, at least when it comes to what people usually mean by "wasting" food.

Usually, when people talk about "wasting food" they mean any time food is thrown away that hasn't spoiled. They seem to be under some belief that it's like some sign that you are "ungrateful" for your mere "luck" that you have food while others don't that you would just throw out food that is still edible rather than force yourself to eat it or find some way, no matter how ridiculous, to give it to somebody else who doesn't have food. They seem to have some special hang up about disposing of food especially, I suspect due to their myopic focus on bare survival needs.

Objectivism would instead say you were "wasting" food only in the same way we might label anything else being "wasted", saying something would only be "wasted" if you had had acted sacrificially in getting rid of it. Whether it is sacrificial to get rid of something in any given situation is heavily dependent upon specifics of the context. (I linked the word "sacrificial" to an explanation by Rand of what she means by that term in case you are unfamiliar with how that term is used among Objectivists as opposed to how it is used by the general population.)

Rediy, I have no idea from where you pulled your notions of anybody being unable to figure out what to do about a subject that wasn't explicitly spoken about by Rand and Peikoff and company. We talk about stuff around here all the time just fine that they haven't addressed specifically. Objectivism involves concepts and logical frame works that one can apply to just about anything in a methodical manner. Also, I don't even get why you would think those are the only two options and why one of them is the righteous answer and the other is a brute's answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try not to buy food I won't eat. But it's more of an esthetic preference than a moral one. It just seems like an ugly thing, to throw food into the trash or flush it down the toilet, as there are people starving in the world.

And yes, I realize that, on a practical level, my actions don't change anything for people who are starving. That's not how economics works. I wouldn't actually be causing anyone to starve, if I bought a bunch of food every week and threw most of it out.

But, just because something doesn't actually hurt people, doesn't mean it isn't ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017/2/12 at 7:06 AM, Nicky said:

I try not to buy food I won't eat. But it's more of an esthetic preference than a moral one. It just seems like an ugly thing, to throw food into the trash or flush it down the toilet, as there are people starving in the world.

And yes, I realize that, on a practical level, my actions don't change anything for people who are starving. That's not how economics works. I wouldn't actually be causing anyone to starve, if I bought a bunch of food every week and threw most of it out.

But, just because something doesn't actually hurt people, doesn't mean it isn't ugly.

That is true
but forgive me for not stating clear in the question
I think morality is something helps us to develop our race sustainably
so to determine whether we are being moral or immoral or neutral can be assessed by our action, whether it can increase the standard of happiness and the development of humanity.

Wasting food can be divided in a few categories, one is simply throw them and the one people cannot finished their meal therefore they have to waste it,etc...

What i am focusing on is latter one, since wasting food is basically wasting resources which ultimately is bad for the development of the humanity, so that is why I think wasting food is an immoral action, but what about unhealthy food?
Like Mcdonalds, even soup from instant noodles, they are so called food waste, if I don't drink the soup therefore flush it down the sink or toilet, I am still wasting soup since I haven't ate the soup and the resources was wasted
but is the action immoral?

Edited by Floyd Yeung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, yeah, you are definitely operating on an entirely different moral system as your basic premise here. Here's a quick primer on the philosophy this forum is about as it seems you may have come across this forum unaware of what Objectivism (the capital "O" matters here, it's the name of a specific philosophy as opposed to a lower case "o" objectivism which may be used to refer to other, very different ideas) is. Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×