I'm not a vegetarian or vegan, so I don't know why you're conflating my devil's advocate argument with those philosophies.
> A mouse’s interests are not on par with the interests of a child
For an anti-speciesist, this is a very anthropocentric and speciesist statement.
I would argue that saving the child would cause greater suffering[0], not only because the human condition unto itself is rife with suffering, but because we have the greatest capacity and demonstrated ability to cause grave harm to all species and to the planet, more so than any other living being.
The voluntary human extinction movement[1] is a very real movement, however ridiculous you find it to be.
> A mouse’s interests are not on par with the interests of a child
For an anti-speciesist, this is a very anthropocentric and speciesist statement.
I would argue that saving the child would cause greater suffering[0], not only because the human condition unto itself is rife with suffering, but because we have the greatest capacity and demonstrated ability to cause grave harm to all species and to the planet, more so than any other living being.
The voluntary human extinction movement[1] is a very real movement, however ridiculous you find it to be.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffering-focused_ethics#Argum...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Mov...