3 ms·

This is such a sophomoric approach to ethics it hardly deserves a response. Animals are not humans. They are hardly likely to have the same capacity to suffer.

by scoofy 11y ago

This is such a sophomoric approach to ethics it hardly deserves a response. Animals are not humans. They are hardly likely to have the same capacity to suffer. Anthropomorphizing them is not a credible way to talk about the issue. At best they ought to be compared to a severely mentally disabled human. Still deserving of dignity, but hardly treated as equal.

noondip 11y ago
Rather than conjecture, why not educate yourself with free films such as Earthlings (available on YouTube) to learn what the experience of others really is like? Edit: your assumption that animals' capacity to suffer and experience fear, pain and misery is dissimilar to ours is rooted in ignorance. If it's academic proof you're desperately after, a great jumping off point is by reading The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, signed by a prominent international group of cognitive neuroscientists, neuropharmacologists, neurophysiologists, neuroanatomists and computational neuroscientists gathered at The University of Cambridge in 2012. http://www.earthintransition.org/2012/07/scientists-declare-nonhuman-animals-are-conscious/ http://www.earthintransition.org/2012/07/scientists-declare-... http://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare-animal-sentience.html http://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare-animal-sent...
- scoofy 11y ago
  I don't understand what this means. I'm a stanch advocate of animal welfare and rights. I think factory farms are absurdly ludicrously immoral. I think that the vast majority of ways we currently raise our mammals and birds is absurdly immoral. Why would watching an animal rights advocacy film help. I was simply objecting to your anthropomorphizing of the way our fellow mammals perceive the world. It's a ludicrous position to take in a serious conversation about ethics. Physical capacity to suffer is one thing, and it's not difficult to argue that mammals suffer similar to the way we do physically, but asking "how I would feel," as though their conscious experience with regards to knowledge of mortality would be similar to ours is speaking nonsense. Furthermore, pointing to an advocacy documentary film to assert a position that even our best academic researchers have little if any way of speaking to seems flippant.
asciimo 11y ago
> At best they ought to be compared to a severely mentally disabled human. Still deserving of dignity, but hardly treated as equal. Is it OK to eat severely mentally disabled humans, if we do so "humanely?"
- scoofy 11y ago
  Obviously not

by scoofy 11y ago

noondip 11y ago

Rather than conjecture, why not educate yourself with free films such as Earthlings (available on YouTube) to learn what the experience of others really is like? Edit: your assumption that animals' capacity to suffer and experience fear, pain and misery is dissimilar to ours is rooted in ignorance. If it's academic proof you're desperately after, a great jumping off point is by reading The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, signed by a prominent international group of cognitive neuroscientists, neuropharmacologists, neurophysiologists, neuroanatomists and computational neuroscientists gathered at The University of Cambridge in 2012. http://www.earthintransition.org/2012/07/scientists-declare-nonhuman-animals-are-conscious/ http://www.earthintransition.org/2012/07/scientists-declare-... http://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare-animal-sentience.html http://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare-animal-sent...

scoofy 11y ago
I don't understand what this means. I'm a stanch advocate of animal welfare and rights. I think factory farms are absurdly ludicrously immoral. I think that the vast majority of ways we currently raise our mammals and birds is absurdly immoral. Why would watching an animal rights advocacy film help. I was simply objecting to your anthropomorphizing of the way our fellow mammals perceive the world. It's a ludicrous position to take in a serious conversation about ethics. Physical capacity to suffer is one thing, and it's not difficult to argue that mammals suffer similar to the way we do physically, but asking "how I would feel," as though their conscious experience with regards to knowledge of mortality would be similar to ours is speaking nonsense. Furthermore, pointing to an advocacy documentary film to assert a position that even our best academic researchers have little if any way of speaking to seems flippant.

asciimo 11y ago

> At best they ought to be compared to a severely mentally disabled human. Still deserving of dignity, but hardly treated as equal. Is it OK to eat severely mentally disabled humans, if we do so "humanely?"

scoofy 11y ago
Obviously not