4 ms·
Your problem is that you are unable to distinguish between humans and other animals. The human tendency to anthromorphize the world is overwhleming. That's wh
by reality_czech 10y ago
Your problem is that you are unable to distinguish between humans and other animals. The human tendency to anthromorphize the world is overwhleming. That's why ancient peoples had stories about Mr. Sun and Mrs. Moon as sentient entities controlling the world. But it just ain't so.
For example, dogs may be loyal companions, but they are also animals. A bitch will eat her own pups if there is not enough food. As with other animals, dogs don't have culture or morality, just instinct and social hierarchies. Cruelty to animals is wrong, but because of the effect it has on the humans, not on the animals. To animals it is just the workings of nature, and animals can and do kill each other, burrow inside eat other and eat each other from the inside out, dig up corpses and play with them, etc. etc. Nature is not your friend-- it's not anyone's friend, and it doesn't wear a human face.
Morality is a human thing. Ironically, people who try to impose some kind of human morality on animals are often the cruellest to them. For example, cats are obligate meat eaters, order Carnivora. They are designed from the ground up as killing machines for mice, birds, and other small animals. They cannot even taste sugar or sweetness in their food, and they certainly don't have grinding teeth to eat plants. But some misguided humans attempt to feed them a vegan diet and they suffer greatly.
Nearly all farm animals would be extinct if it weren't for human desire for their meat and other products. Maybe goats could survive, but certainly not cows or chickens. But vegans seem to think genociding their species is better than having them live on farms.
- codezero 10y agowhy should I distinguish between humans and other animals? The position industrialized farmed animals are in, is a position we put them in because of our supposed superiority. Animals would only be extinct because we've killed them all. We manipulated life forms for our purposes. That doesn't mean that we deserve the fruits of their demise.
- rosser 10y agoAre you seriously trying to use the fact that some dipshit hippie types have tried to feed their cats vegan diets as an argument for ... honestly, I'm not even sure what you're arguing for, here. Do you actually believe it's somehow morally superior for billions of livestock animals to live in what's effectively a concentration camp, only to be slaughtered, callously and without regard for the suffering they might experience along the way, than for that artificially propagated species to go extinct?
- nefitty 10y agoCodezero doesn't have a problem. Living according to ethical ideals is a difficult endeavor. People should expect to struggle with any project that is worth pursuing. I personally wouldn't have a problem if cows or other farm animals went extinct. The point to me is to reduce the net suffering in the world. You can drag that sentiment to its logical conclusion (the extinction of all life), but I'm of course also guided by emotion, reason, survival instincts, etc. which puts a practical bound on how far the idea should go. If we can't ethically care for a species that depends on us for survival then better to let it fade away.
- codezero 10y agoAnd cows don't have a problem if you go extinct. Wouldn't it be nice if they did... and you did? We could help each other.
- reality_czech 10y agoCool, my first death threat on HN.
- reality_czech 10y agoI'm glad that you realize that the logical conclusion of your ideas is that life is a bad thing. What is wrong is your attempt to fudge your own conclusion rather than examine your incorrect assumptions. Suffering is just the shadow cast by happiness. You can't have pleasure without pain.
- namuol 10y agoYes, humans definitely have the moral high-ground. We're much smarter, for one! For example: animals aren't capable of the mental gymnastics required to quell their ability to feel empathy.