Response to Courtney

Courtney asks, "If there are viable alternatives to real fur in our society (like the realistic faux fur), why do some still use real fur?"

I think that wearing fur has much to do with status in society. People want to show off that they had enough money to purchase fur. It is not so much that the fur itself holds any value in itself, just the value that human beings put behind it. It is much the same in the case of diamonds. They are just a stone that comes out of the ground like any other stone, but their value is high because, for whatever reason, humans feel the need to but arbitrary systems of value in place. Perhaps this is part of nature. People who wear diamonds often know that 2/3 of the world's diamonds are blood diamonds (also known as conflict diamonds) and that it is likely that people in Africa have given their lives just so you can have a pretty ring or necklace. If humans place so little value on the lives of other human beings, how can we expect that they will give the same consideration to the lives of animals?

I personally think that it is morally wrong to wear both diamonds and fur and therefore have a hard time understand how people who are informed of what they are wearing can still do so. I suppose that what is at work here is a the very powerful phenomenon out of sight, out of mind. Humans are very selfish creatures and it is easy for us to put aside the suffering of others for our own enjoyment, much the same way that meat lovers enjoy eating animals because it brings them pleasure despite the suffering of the animal.

My question is do you think that our arbitrary systems of value will ever cease to exist and allow us to value other beings over possessions or is it something too deeply rooted in our society?