11 ms·

I almost felt guilty for taking fish oil and eating sushi, but then it's clear that a fever reflex doesn't equate to missing Jane the cute fish next door, writi

I almost felt guilty for taking fish oil and eating sushi, but then it's clear that a fever reflex doesn't equate to missing Jane the cute fish next door, writing Leaves of Kelp or being jealous of Henry's dorsal fins, although I must admit they are quite impressive. It might seem anthropocentric (it's definitely anthropomorphic), but Jane was really tasty with soy sauce and wasabi.

wrong_variable 11y ago
There is nothing I can do about sushi. But you can buy manufactured Omega 3 and 6 from plants. I alternate between them to minimize the damage I am doing to the planet.
- wantreprenr007 11y ago
  I was kidding. Of course I eat walnuts, pecans and other low-water tree nuts; fish, not so much.
alexashka 11y ago
Don't feel bad - fish eat other fish. We eat animals, animals eat us. Circle of life.
- trentmb 11y ago
  If we were strictly hunter-gatherer, sure. As far as I know, humans have a monopoly on the industrialzation of livestock production.
  - noonespecial 11y ago
    Ants farm aphids. Even use chemicals to do it. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071009212548.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071009212548.h...
    - trentmb 11y ago
      Whoah, cool. Even more reason to empathize with animals!
    - br3w5 11y ago
      When looking at the world from the window of a plane humans look a lot like ants
  - greggman 11y ago
    Depends on the definition of "industrialization" http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150105-animals-that-grow-their-own-food http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150105-animals-that-grow-th...
- noondip 11y ago
  Non-human animal activities should not provide a logical or moral foundation for our behavior and it is illogical to claim that we should eat the same diet they do, especially as most of them are obligatory carnivores killing for survival, whereas humans physiologically resemble frugivores. Also your reasoning would justify killing companion animals and also humans - after all, "circle of life". More importantly, we recognize that unlike animals, we cannot justify taking the life of a sentient being for no better reason than our personal dietary preferences. So it is probably not useful to consider the behavior of fish when making decisions about our own behavior.
  - alexashka 11y ago
    People have been killing each other since the beginning of time. Are we living on the same planet? Why do I have to give eating salmon any thought? Here's a question to ponder: what are morals and these 'should's you describe meant for? For people to share common values so that we get along better, right? That's created by humans, FOR humans, that we want to get along with! For everything else, I don't really understand. I am nice to squirrels, I just happen to like them. Rats, I don't like. Cockroaches I really don't like - when I see one in my house, I take a slipper and kill that sucka. Am I supposed to justify stomping on a cockroach too? Where does this moralizing end?
    - cnp 11y ago
      It ends when you finally recognize that killing the cockroach is arbitrary and unnecessary.
      - alphapapa 11y ago
        You move in to a new apartment. Your first night, at 2 am, you hear a noise. You turn on the bedside lamp and see several cockroaches scurry under your bed. What do you do?
        vertex-four 11y ago
        I used to live in India, that's the norm. We lived with them. The trick is that there's other things that eat cockroaches, that we also lived with, so it doesn't get too much of an issue. A house is part of an ecosystem, not a sterile environment. For the record, it's almost guaranteed that any rice you eat in India has had cockroaches in the rice sack. Not a lot you can do about it. That's why we wash and cook things.
- Pxtl 11y ago
  But the difference is that animals have no alternative to doing so but death. If they do not hunt, they die. We have the privilege of being able to choose to live without doing that.
  - Retra 11y ago
    But that's just presupposing that it is correct to do so.
    - SwellJoe 11y ago
      How do you figure it "presupposes" anything? The assumption in every culture I've lived in has been that eating animals and their byproducts is not only acceptable, but the right thing to do. That is the default; the "presupposed" belief. But, it is a belief that requires no evidence to be accepted by the majority of people. When shown evidence that animals experience suffering because of this behavior, and when shown evidence that animal agriculture is disastrous for the environment, you have evidence on which to make decisions from an ethical perspective, and not merely a cultural history perspective. What you do with that evidence is up to you, of course; the law will likely never, in our lifetimes, be strict enough to prevent animal suffering or environmental catastrophe. So, it's your decision to participate in it, or not, and to what degree.
- wantreprenr007 11y ago
  First, condescending backslapping is rude and rationalization of ignorance is dumb. The sheer volume of methane from animal production is raising the temperature of the planet dangerously. Next, the Petri dish that is playing Russian Roulette by exhausing antibiotics and incubating the next pandemic are the two final nails in the coffin of meat. Good luck with that belief that energy-intensive lifestyle should or can scale to 10 billion people. We should be setting a better example for developing nations and choosing wiser diet and lifestyle behaviors which won't doom us to move entire cities inland.

wrong_variable 11y ago

There is nothing I can do about sushi. But you can buy manufactured Omega 3 and 6 from plants. I alternate between them to minimize the damage I am doing to the planet.

wantreprenr007 11y ago
I was kidding. Of course I eat walnuts, pecans and other low-water tree nuts; fish, not so much.

alexashka 11y ago

Don't feel bad - fish eat other fish. We eat animals, animals eat us. Circle of life.

trentmb 11y ago
If we were strictly hunter-gatherer, sure. As far as I know, humans have a monopoly on the industrialzation of livestock production.
- noonespecial 11y ago
  Ants farm aphids. Even use chemicals to do it. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071009212548.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071009212548.h...
  - trentmb 11y ago
    Whoah, cool. Even more reason to empathize with animals!
  - br3w5 11y ago
    When looking at the world from the window of a plane humans look a lot like ants
- greggman 11y ago
  Depends on the definition of "industrialization" http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150105-animals-that-grow-their-own-food http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150105-animals-that-grow-th...
noondip 11y ago
Non-human animal activities should not provide a logical or moral foundation for our behavior and it is illogical to claim that we should eat the same diet they do, especially as most of them are obligatory carnivores killing for survival, whereas humans physiologically resemble frugivores. Also your reasoning would justify killing companion animals and also humans - after all, "circle of life". More importantly, we recognize that unlike animals, we cannot justify taking the life of a sentient being for no better reason than our personal dietary preferences. So it is probably not useful to consider the behavior of fish when making decisions about our own behavior.
- alexashka 11y ago
  People have been killing each other since the beginning of time. Are we living on the same planet? Why do I have to give eating salmon any thought? Here's a question to ponder: what are morals and these 'should's you describe meant for? For people to share common values so that we get along better, right? That's created by humans, FOR humans, that we want to get along with! For everything else, I don't really understand. I am nice to squirrels, I just happen to like them. Rats, I don't like. Cockroaches I really don't like - when I see one in my house, I take a slipper and kill that sucka. Am I supposed to justify stomping on a cockroach too? Where does this moralizing end?
  - cnp 11y ago
    It ends when you finally recognize that killing the cockroach is arbitrary and unnecessary.
    - alphapapa 11y ago
      You move in to a new apartment. Your first night, at 2 am, you hear a noise. You turn on the bedside lamp and see several cockroaches scurry under your bed. What do you do?
      - vertex-four 11y ago
        I used to live in India, that's the norm. We lived with them. The trick is that there's other things that eat cockroaches, that we also lived with, so it doesn't get too much of an issue. A house is part of an ecosystem, not a sterile environment. For the record, it's almost guaranteed that any rice you eat in India has had cockroaches in the rice sack. Not a lot you can do about it. That's why we wash and cook things.
Pxtl 11y ago
But the difference is that animals have no alternative to doing so but death. If they do not hunt, they die. We have the privilege of being able to choose to live without doing that.
- Retra 11y ago
  But that's just presupposing that it is correct to do so.
  - SwellJoe 11y ago
    How do you figure it "presupposes" anything? The assumption in every culture I've lived in has been that eating animals and their byproducts is not only acceptable, but the right thing to do. That is the default; the "presupposed" belief. But, it is a belief that requires no evidence to be accepted by the majority of people. When shown evidence that animals experience suffering because of this behavior, and when shown evidence that animal agriculture is disastrous for the environment, you have evidence on which to make decisions from an ethical perspective, and not merely a cultural history perspective. What you do with that evidence is up to you, of course; the law will likely never, in our lifetimes, be strict enough to prevent animal suffering or environmental catastrophe. So, it's your decision to participate in it, or not, and to what degree.
wantreprenr007 11y ago
First, condescending backslapping is rude and rationalization of ignorance is dumb. The sheer volume of methane from animal production is raising the temperature of the planet dangerously. Next, the Petri dish that is playing Russian Roulette by exhausing antibiotics and incubating the next pandemic are the two final nails in the coffin of meat. Good luck with that belief that energy-intensive lifestyle should or can scale to 10 billion people. We should be setting a better example for developing nations and choosing wiser diet and lifestyle behaviors which won't doom us to move entire cities inland.