Justifiable or Understandable

In response to Raj - full post here

I think there are many interesting things to consider here. For instance, even if trophy hunting was understandable given the situation in Zimbabwe, is it morally justified? I would tend to say no; I think it is still morally unjustified, especially given the deaths of so many elephants who are intelligent, sentient, and inherently worth much.

This situation reminds me of slavery; without slavery, the southern economy would have taken a very large hit, and would have sent them into uncertainty. Even if the south, however, was destined to fail if the abolished slavery, does that mean that slavery was morally justified, or rather that it was morally understandable? I think in the cases of the southern USA and Zimbabwe, the actions are understandable but not justifiable. People in both areas had/have the moral duty to try to end those practices regardless of how well the practices work and how understandable they are.

Trivial Human Interests

In response to Quincy - full post here

I would agree with your assessment of the meaning of trivial human interests. I am not yet sure if trivial human interests means that the action brought about through the interest is necessarily immoral. I think the relative immorality depends on the treatment of the animal as well. If an non-human animal had to die in order to be a spectacle at a zoo, then it would certainly be immoral.

One trivial human interest that I think is most prevalent in our society and is often overlooked as trivial is the consumption of meat. Most human beings can survive quite well with a vegetarian diet - that is, a diet without meat. Many humans continue to bring about the deaths of animals for consumption because it's slightly inconvenient to not do so and/or because they like the taste of meat. I think both of those are rather trivial interests, and, seeing as how it does require the death of a non-human animal, it is certainly not a morally justified action for most human beings.