I find the measurement-based arguments compelling. What shifted my perspective on offsetting was something I heard recently:
Consider a friend you genuinely admire. Then you discover that occasionally, they steal homeless people's blankets (or whatever else). Your view of them would change dramatically — not because the "net harm" calculation works out a certain way, but because the behavior reveals something about their character that can't be neutralized by good deeds elsewhere.
Anyways, this just makes me think how veganism is about moral consistency, which is something you can't offset.
(I say this as someone who was vegan for 4 yrs and now am no longer, but am now reconsidering my non-veganism re these influences)
I find the measurement-based arguments compelling. What shifted my perspective on offsetting was something I heard recently:
Consider a friend you genuinely admire. Then you discover that occasionally, they steal homeless people's blankets (or whatever else). Your view of them would change dramatically — not because the "net harm" calculation works out a certain way, but because the behavior reveals something about their character that can't be neutralized by good deeds elsewhere.
Anyways, this just makes me think how veganism is about moral consistency, which is something you can't offset.
(I say this as someone who was vegan for 4 yrs and now am no longer, but am now reconsidering my non-veganism re these influences)