Does make the need for predation to live make a creature evil?

[RepresentingDesire]

Is it evil to kill (and eat the prey) to survive?
I'm interested in what you think.

Furthermore is there a difference for you between something like a vampire killing and drinking the blood of a human and something like a wolf killing and eating a sheep?

 

[Valmond]

Should try Tales of Berseria, this was a moral question in the game.

That killing is also a way to save someone.

 

[expentio]

I'd say it depends. If the creature is intelligent, as in not just following their instincts to fill their needs, the important factor is whether or not they have to kill.
Vampires for example can surely meet arrangements that don't require to fully drain their victim. If the being actually has a choice that avoids ending a life but chooses still to go for it then that's on them.
Something that needs to eat fresh human flesh on the other hand can't be quite held accountable. However, in the second case, there's no ground for negotiation. Morality doesn't matter if this thing just has to kill you or others. So you're equally in the right to end this threat and don't feel bad about it, because there isn't really an alternative.
Of course, there's the moral grey area that they could have officially signed up for the military and are only killing bad guys. Yet that's a special case in my book.

 

[Tyranomaster]

Predation is a natural thing. More terrifying is that most non-predators still gladly eat meat. (Look up opportunistic carnivores, there is a video of a deer biting a bird out of the air). Non-sentient beings are ok to eat. Mostly because, save for perhaps a handful of single celled organisms, and algae like kelp, everything eats everything, it's just recycling biological material. Killing is a natural part of that. It only becomes questionable when those entities really have the ability to elucidate why they wish to live. Eating sentient beings without very strict consent rules is a no go. It's also generally dangerous to eat your own species due to diseases.

An unthinking predator that eats humans isn't really evil, it's just scary.

 

[LilRora]

No. Hard no unless you narrow down the question.

I could insert a classic "being born doesn't make you evil" and it's not strictly wrong, but I don't like that way of thinking. Instead, I approach evil first, because what makes something evil? Perspective, that's what, and ingrained values. A lot of people consider cannibalism evil, and for a good reason, but that's just a value in the society we live in - there are places where that's normal, and in fantasy, there could very well be a whole world where that's normal.

For your question, to kill and eat prey is not broadly evil in our society. This may obviously depend on the place, but in general it is not. I prefer to look at it a bit mathematically - if there are cases when it is false, it is not true.

Personally, I think it's stupid to say to kill and eat prey is evil, at least in general. In specific cases it may make sense, but when I reiterate it into "is it evil to survive the way you are born to?", then trying to argue it is broadly evil seems equivalent to calling the entire existence of predators evil, which doesn't make much sense outside very extreme worldviews that most people consider rather detached from reality.

For the second question, there is no significant objective difference (in both cases it's a prey-predator relationship), but there is a difference from a social and cultural standpoint. It's just a matter of perspective then.

 

[3guanoff]

You could name their species kindness. After all, it's not that bad if you are killed by kindness, is it?

 

[cabbag3]

I thought this was another vegan question before opening the thread.

 

[Piisfun]

If it did, then pretty much every species of cat is evil.

 

[GlassRose]

It's inherent to nature, and nature is amoral; morality does not apply.

 

[John_Owl]

good and evil are not objective. it's entirely subjective, opposite to how most people view it. evil is inherently opposite to how WE think. But a vampire might see it that anything opposite to their requirement to continue life is evil.

So yes, a vampire, being opposed to our continued survival, would be evil. If vampires were the prevelent species on the world, then being opposed to their survival would be evil.

 

[Viator]

Is it evil to kill (and eat the prey) to survive?
I'm interested in what you think.

Furthermore is there a difference for you between something like a vampire killing and drinking the blood of a human and something like a wolf killing and eating a sheep?

No, it is simply nature. It is no more evil to kill a creature for sustenance, and continued existence than it is to defend your life from a predator attempting to do the same.

As for vampires, it is not the idea of drinking of human blood that made the vampire evil, in the traditional sense, but that they are in some way an abomination or subversion of nature (God) itself through undeath. Rather than being seen as natural occurance, they are seen as a curse, blight, or disease, one that could exponentially grow. They lost their personhood due their unnatural status and were simply monstrous manifestations of evil.

I love a good vampire tale. For a lot of the modern takes of vampires we see today, depending on what story elements were present, I wouldn't think they were evil simply by feeding on humans to survive, but it isn't evil for a human to defend themselves either.

Life feeds on life. No matter what you choose to eat, whatever it is, was living in some fashion and died so you or another creature could live. That's just the cycle of things.

 

[Thraben]

Absolutely not. Otherwise, every animal, humans included, is definitionally evil for participating or being complicit to predation.

Yes, even herbivore animals and vegan humans are guilty. Even herbivore animals drive out competition to starvation (killing them) to secure their own food resources.

On the other hand, I'd love a see a 'biblical apocalypse' story where everyone is damned to apocalypse because of this very violation of the 'no killing' policy.

 

[Prince_Azmiran_Myrian]

Animals do not have moral agency.

Monsters on the other hand... well they have changed considerably over the years. Nowadays are treated just like different kinds of animals, but this was not their original understanding.
Supernatural beings that want to kill steal destroy would be evil. Fairly simple.

 

[Phantonym]

Honestly it’s about perspective, you could argue about this in circles. It’s about how you make your readers perceive it through how you write

 

[RepresentingDesire]

More terrifying is that most non-predators still gladly eat meat. (Look up opportunistic carnivores, there is a video of a deer biting a bird out of the air).

Where is that terrifying? Opportunistic carnivores don't even hunt and just use a opportunity, it might help the diat but there should be herbivores the aren't even opportunistic carnivores and just predate plants.

then trying to argue it is broadly evil seems equivalent to calling the entire existence of predators evil, which doesn't make much sense outside very extreme worldviews that most people consider rather detached from reality.

Sharks? They are accidental human biter yet it was allowed to nearly kill every shark because the absolute majority of people hate them, it might be an extreme example but such people are rather more normal as far as I know.

I thought this was another vegan question before opening the thread.

No, vegans are included in the question, not that anybody really thought so intentionally.

Yes, even herbivore animals and vegan humans are guilty. Even herbivore animals drive out competition to starvation (killing them) to secure their own food resources.

I'm happy the you mentioned it, I see that point rarely made, herbivores stop predate other creatures though, plants.

Honestly it’s about perspective, you could argue about this in circles. It’s about how you make your writers perceive it through how you write

The answer I would give because morality is subjective, which would ignore it's pseudo existence but that makes it subjective.

 

[Phantonym]

Where is that terrifying? Opportunistic carnivores don't even hunt and just use a opportunity, it might help the diat but there should be herbivores the aren't even opportunistic carnivores and just predate plants.

Sharks? They are accidental human biter yet it was allowed to nearly kill every shark because the absolute majority of people hate them, it might be an extreme example but such people are rather more normal as far as I know.

No, vegans are included in the question, not that anybody really thought so intentionally.

I'm happy the you mentioned it, I see that point rarely made, herbivores stop predate other creatures though, plants.

The answer I would give because morality is subjective, which would ignore it's pseudo existence but that makes it subjective.

Big words

 

[CharlesEBrown]

It is only "evil" if EITHER:
1) The killing is done solely for either pleasure or "just because" and the consuming is either just a ritual thing (like only eating the heart and leaving the rest to rot) or just an after thought (Oh, let's nibble on this fresh corpse, since it's just lying here anyway)
OR
2) The killer enjoys killing and/or making their prey suffer first, regardless of intent or need to consume.

Housecats are capable of true evil, as are humans. Most other animals are morally neutral at best.

 

[Phantonym]

It is only "evil" if EITHER:
1) The killing is done solely for either pleasure or "just because" and the consuming is either just a ritual thing (like only eating the heart and leaving the rest to rot) or just an after thought (Oh, let's nibble on this fresh corpse, since it's just lying here anyway)
OR
2) The killer enjoys killing and/or making their prey suffer first, regardless of intent or need to consume.

Housecats are capable of true evil, as are humans. Most other animals are morally neutral at best.

Don't you just love moral dilemmas?

 

[LilRora]

Sharks? They are accidental human biter yet it was allowed to nearly kill every shark because the absolute majority of people hate them, it might be an extreme example but such people are rather more normal as far as I know.

trying to argue it is broadly evil seems equivalent to calling the entire existence of predators evil, which doesn't make much sense outside very extreme worldviews that most people consider rather detached from reality.

 

[Phantonym]

If its evil than the vegans are right... And who wants to admit that VEGANS are right?