18 ms·

>Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different Most mammals react to painful stimuli (which we can provide a baseline for by testing it on o

>Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different Most mammals react to painful stimuli (which we can provide a baseline for by testing it on other humans, whom you luckily consider to be reliable enough) with aversion and fear. We 'ask' this question of many animals quite frequently, and have throughout history. The answers are reliable and consistent. >If most people agree they do not want to pay taxes, do taxes become evil? There is no objective reason to consider 'most people agree on x' as some kind of objective moral imperative. There is no moral quality to caring what people want. I don't think this is a very sound basis for an objective morality starts to construct argument sees sophistry in re 'suffering' downthread Equivocating physical and emotional and social 'suffering'? Nope! As to your edit, your perspective on other people's perspective is familiar and disturbing. I think you should reexamine your eagerness to throw around the word 'objective', your penchant for jumping to conclusions regarding your interlocutors, and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. Or, because you're right and you know it, ignore the entirety of this post.

Amezarak 10y ago
> Equivocating physical and emotional and social 'suffering'? Nope! I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly. > and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. I was describing how people in general work, not 'othering members of my social circle.' People do not respond positively to being told something they do or like is evil. I don't think that is a controversial statement.
- justratsinacoat 10y ago
  >I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly This behaviour you describe is usually mediated by some kind of non-biological impulse -- like the 'certain' 'knowledge' that the Hairy Thunderer/Cosmic Muffin will reward this suffering in some future-/afterlife. Those impulses are all related to the pointless social factors that you decry. These people suffering is still an evil, even if they ultimately inspire something that outweighs the evil of their suffering (religious revolution, buying time/forgiveness for their loved ones, etc). Plus, you're still splitting hairs because it's not like these individuals are feeling pleasure or not anticipating pain uncomfortably. Next up, BDSM! >>>You're simply trying to exploit a "hack" in my social animal brain, which is that if you tell me that something is wrong, you are telling me that other members of the human herd will judge me unfavorably and perhaps ostracize me or otherwise punish me. Some people, but not very many, will be swayed by your attempted brain-exploit. But I, again, observe that my conscious feels guilt-free, which is a very strong sign that the people I am surrounded by do not, in fact, disapprove of my eating meat, and also that the vast majority of people I know actually eat meat. So somewhere in my hindbrain, I realize that you are (from my perspective) lying to me, and it will make me instinctively resentful of you, because you have marked yourself as a member of The Other You typed this, right? Then you typed: >> and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. >I was describing how people in general work, not 'othering members of my social circle.' People do not respond positively to being told something they do or like is evil. I don't think that is a controversial statement Is this how 'people in general work', or is this you Othering someone? Did your interlocutor turn out to be utilizing the technique you perceived him to be?
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    > Is this how 'people in general work' Yes. > or is this you Othering someone? Who would be othered by that statement? > Did your interlocutor turn out to be utilizing the technique you perceived him to be? That statement is about a fact, not anyone else in the conversation, so it doesn't matter.
    - justratsinacoat 10y ago
      >> Is this how 'people in general work' >Yes. Well, that was a quick 'discussion'! Glad you came along! Thanks for the downvote!
      - Dylan16807 10y ago
        > Well, that was a quick 'discussion'! Glad you came along! You're welcome! The discussion of how there is an impulse for people to get upset and defensive when told they're wrong, and how it impedes learning, is very well established. It's not worth wasting time on a weird side argument about it. The answer is just 'yes, that happens a lot'. Edit: > Thanks for the downvote! Hey, feel free to continue with the rest of the conversation without me. I'm not going to judge. I'm only going to snip at weird unproductive semi-insulting tangents.
        justratsinacoat 10y ago
        >The discussion of how there is an impulse for people to get upset and defensive when told they're wrong, and how it impedes learning, is very well established. It's not worth wasting time on a weird side argument about it. The answer is just 'yes, that happens a lot'. What the hell? I guess that's what I must have been talking about! Thanks for informing me of what I was talking about! I totally agree that "people to get upset and defensive when told they're wrong, and how it impedes learning"; I'm experiencing it right now! Of course, now that you've shaped the discussion toward your end, I won't even try to have a 'conversation' with you. >Hey, feel free to continue with the rest of the conversation without me. I'm not going to judge. I'm only going to snip at weird unproductive semi-insulting tangents With unproductive semi-insulting tangents; it's almost like-- ah, sorry, everything is suddenly illuminated. Carry on.
vasilipupkin 10y ago
Reacting to painful stimuli is not clearly the right yardstick. If I build a deep belief network which meows every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and wags a tail every time maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human ? I'd say no. Similarly, the fact that a cow reacts to pain stimuli doesn't automatically mean that I shouldnt eat that cow
- justratsinacoat 10y ago
  Nowhere did I claim that pigs ought to be treated as humans. For that matter, nowhere did I say you shouldn't eat that cow. Why are you trying to imply that I did? Your thought experiment ignores a lot of established facts, like the neurological structural similarities between, say, pigs and humans. Both have amygdalae, both have periaqueductal grey, both have similar pain avoidance behaviours. Why not assume that pigs feel pain? If you're willing to ignore structural (same hardware) and behavioural (same software) similarities between pigs and humans, how can you tell that I feel pain? If my similarities to you in both physicality and reaction are not enough to convince you I feel pain, why are my words enough? And if they are, if I build a deep belief network which says "ouch, fuck" every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and says "awesome" every time it maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human? I'd say no.
  - vasilipupkin 10y ago
    Well, since humans are conscious and are able to communicate with each other clearly, we can tell pretty well what it means for a human to feel pain. It's far less clear what it means for a pig. But if you believe that humans and pigs feel pain in a very similar or basically identical manner, then what justification can you have to eat pigs and cause them that pain that you think they feel?
    - justratsinacoat 10y ago
      >>If my similarities to you in both physicality and reaction are not enough to convince you I feel pain, why are my words enough? And if they are, if I build a deep belief network which says "ouch, fuck" every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and says "awesome" every time it maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human? >Well, since humans are conscious and are able to communicate with each other clearly, we can tell pretty well what it means for a human to feel pain Why is this? Why not assume other humans are philosophical zombies[0]? Again, if I can build some dumb machine to say "ouch", lacking all other known physiological correlates to pain (like structures involved in processing pain, withdrawing from 'painful' stimuli, vocalizing sharply when in 'pain'), why isn't it in pain? >what justification can you have to eat pigs and cause them that pain that you think they feel? I don't care enough. I eat meat because it's tasty! That doesn't mean I can't try to ensure the things I eat live mildly fulfilling lives before their mostly pain-free deaths. I try to buy meat from places like this [1] because while I want to eat meat and see nothing wrong with it, there's a huge difference between a chicken who has been able to wander about and have a chickeny social network and eat bugs (even if its world is a big open-air warehouse barn) and a chicken who has spent most of its short fat life in a small dark cage. I don't follow this principle all the time, or I'd be restricted from fast food, eating out with friends, etc. I imagine anyone who buys cheap clothes but abhors sweatshops, or who buys consumer electronics but is made uncomfortable by rare-earth mining practices and Foxconn working conditions, or who pays taxes but objects to some horror the government perpetrates with the money, knows what I'm talking about. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie [1] http://rowefarms.ca/our-farming-philosophies.php http://rowefarms.ca/our-farming-philosophies.php
TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
>> Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different > Most mammals react to painful stimuli <snip> Which didn't really address the parent's point. Since we can't ask the animals we can't know, so perhaps the pig consensus is: "Yeah, look, we know you're killing us and eating us, but we really don't care. In fact, we like it, prefer. Put it this way, if we were our there in the wild we'd have to fend for ourselves, and either get eaten by our predators, or die of disease or old age. At least you kill us quickly. You don't even extend that dignity to your own kind, nope, you let each other, sometimes even force each other, to suffer till the very last breath and extract as much economic value out of each other as you can via the 'health care system' and 'palliative care', and then you don't even have the dignity to eat, or otherwise recycle, the carcass, no you just bury it in cemeteries where you don't grow food, or worse yet burn them, whereby the worms can't even eat them, and worsen your carbon pollution problem." And there ya go, absurd isn't it. I certainly think so. I live near pasture, we walk the dogs through it, the cows that hang out there are protective of their young, and definitely appear to have something going on between their eyes, they're quite adorable, both the young and old, and recently they're no longer there. Perhaps they got moved, perhaps we've eaten them. They could very well have ended up on my plate and I wouldn't know. But at least their lives had meaning and purpose, which is more than I can say for my life at times. The only reason I won't eat my dogs is through some quirt of culture that causes me think doing so is weird. > Or, because you're right and you know it, ignore the entirety of this post. Absolutely. If all we have is opinion, let's go with mine, because I guarantee it's stronger than yours. I'm even willing to go to war over it. Well, not me personally, I prefer baths and hot cups of tea, but we do seem quite eager to send each others children off to war. I'm trying to be facetious here, because I don't really understand why people bother to keep having these arguments over differences of opinion. It generally doesn't work, unless someone is almost already there but hasn't quite accepted that they agree with you. As Amezarak suggest in the last paragraph, perhaps the best way to go about changing culture is to attempt to gradually shift the Overton window[1], because right now the idea of Vegetarian or Vegan as policy or law is very much in the 'Unthinkable' stage. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
dang 10y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12026276 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12026276 and marked it off-topic.

Amezarak 10y ago

> Equivocating physical and emotional and social 'suffering'? Nope! I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly. > and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. I was describing how people in general work, not 'othering members of my social circle.' People do not respond positively to being told something they do or like is evil. I don't think that is a controversial statement.

justratsinacoat 10y ago
>I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly This behaviour you describe is usually mediated by some kind of non-biological impulse -- like the 'certain' 'knowledge' that the Hairy Thunderer/Cosmic Muffin will reward this suffering in some future-/afterlife. Those impulses are all related to the pointless social factors that you decry. These people suffering is still an evil, even if they ultimately inspire something that outweighs the evil of their suffering (religious revolution, buying time/forgiveness for their loved ones, etc). Plus, you're still splitting hairs because it's not like these individuals are feeling pleasure or not anticipating pain uncomfortably. Next up, BDSM! >>>You're simply trying to exploit a "hack" in my social animal brain, which is that if you tell me that something is wrong, you are telling me that other members of the human herd will judge me unfavorably and perhaps ostracize me or otherwise punish me. Some people, but not very many, will be swayed by your attempted brain-exploit. But I, again, observe that my conscious feels guilt-free, which is a very strong sign that the people I am surrounded by do not, in fact, disapprove of my eating meat, and also that the vast majority of people I know actually eat meat. So somewhere in my hindbrain, I realize that you are (from my perspective) lying to me, and it will make me instinctively resentful of you, because you have marked yourself as a member of The Other You typed this, right? Then you typed: >> and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. >I was describing how people in general work, not 'othering members of my social circle.' People do not respond positively to being told something they do or like is evil. I don't think that is a controversial statement Is this how 'people in general work', or is this you Othering someone? Did your interlocutor turn out to be utilizing the technique you perceived him to be?
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  > Is this how 'people in general work' Yes. > or is this you Othering someone? Who would be othered by that statement? > Did your interlocutor turn out to be utilizing the technique you perceived him to be? That statement is about a fact, not anyone else in the conversation, so it doesn't matter.
  - justratsinacoat 10y ago
    >> Is this how 'people in general work' >Yes. Well, that was a quick 'discussion'! Glad you came along! Thanks for the downvote!
    - Dylan16807 10y ago
      > Well, that was a quick 'discussion'! Glad you came along! You're welcome! The discussion of how there is an impulse for people to get upset and defensive when told they're wrong, and how it impedes learning, is very well established. It's not worth wasting time on a weird side argument about it. The answer is just 'yes, that happens a lot'. Edit: > Thanks for the downvote! Hey, feel free to continue with the rest of the conversation without me. I'm not going to judge. I'm only going to snip at weird unproductive semi-insulting tangents.
      - justratsinacoat 10y ago
        >The discussion of how there is an impulse for people to get upset and defensive when told they're wrong, and how it impedes learning, is very well established. It's not worth wasting time on a weird side argument about it. The answer is just 'yes, that happens a lot'. What the hell? I guess that's what I must have been talking about! Thanks for informing me of what I was talking about! I totally agree that "people to get upset and defensive when told they're wrong, and how it impedes learning"; I'm experiencing it right now! Of course, now that you've shaped the discussion toward your end, I won't even try to have a 'conversation' with you. >Hey, feel free to continue with the rest of the conversation without me. I'm not going to judge. I'm only going to snip at weird unproductive semi-insulting tangents With unproductive semi-insulting tangents; it's almost like-- ah, sorry, everything is suddenly illuminated. Carry on.

vasilipupkin 10y ago

Reacting to painful stimuli is not clearly the right yardstick. If I build a deep belief network which meows every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and wags a tail every time maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human ? I'd say no. Similarly, the fact that a cow reacts to pain stimuli doesn't automatically mean that I shouldnt eat that cow

justratsinacoat 10y ago
Nowhere did I claim that pigs ought to be treated as humans. For that matter, nowhere did I say you shouldn't eat that cow. Why are you trying to imply that I did? Your thought experiment ignores a lot of established facts, like the neurological structural similarities between, say, pigs and humans. Both have amygdalae, both have periaqueductal grey, both have similar pain avoidance behaviours. Why not assume that pigs feel pain? If you're willing to ignore structural (same hardware) and behavioural (same software) similarities between pigs and humans, how can you tell that I feel pain? If my similarities to you in both physicality and reaction are not enough to convince you I feel pain, why are my words enough? And if they are, if I build a deep belief network which says "ouch, fuck" every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and says "awesome" every time it maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human? I'd say no.
- vasilipupkin 10y ago
  Well, since humans are conscious and are able to communicate with each other clearly, we can tell pretty well what it means for a human to feel pain. It's far less clear what it means for a pig. But if you believe that humans and pigs feel pain in a very similar or basically identical manner, then what justification can you have to eat pigs and cause them that pain that you think they feel?
  - justratsinacoat 10y ago
    >>If my similarities to you in both physicality and reaction are not enough to convince you I feel pain, why are my words enough? And if they are, if I build a deep belief network which says "ouch, fuck" every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and says "awesome" every time it maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human? >Well, since humans are conscious and are able to communicate with each other clearly, we can tell pretty well what it means for a human to feel pain Why is this? Why not assume other humans are philosophical zombies[0]? Again, if I can build some dumb machine to say "ouch", lacking all other known physiological correlates to pain (like structures involved in processing pain, withdrawing from 'painful' stimuli, vocalizing sharply when in 'pain'), why isn't it in pain? >what justification can you have to eat pigs and cause them that pain that you think they feel? I don't care enough. I eat meat because it's tasty! That doesn't mean I can't try to ensure the things I eat live mildly fulfilling lives before their mostly pain-free deaths. I try to buy meat from places like this [1] because while I want to eat meat and see nothing wrong with it, there's a huge difference between a chicken who has been able to wander about and have a chickeny social network and eat bugs (even if its world is a big open-air warehouse barn) and a chicken who has spent most of its short fat life in a small dark cage. I don't follow this principle all the time, or I'd be restricted from fast food, eating out with friends, etc. I imagine anyone who buys cheap clothes but abhors sweatshops, or who buys consumer electronics but is made uncomfortable by rare-earth mining practices and Foxconn working conditions, or who pays taxes but objects to some horror the government perpetrates with the money, knows what I'm talking about. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie [1] http://rowefarms.ca/our-farming-philosophies.php http://rowefarms.ca/our-farming-philosophies.php

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

>> Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different > Most mammals react to painful stimuli <snip> Which didn't really address the parent's point. Since we can't ask the animals we can't know, so perhaps the pig consensus is: "Yeah, look, we know you're killing us and eating us, but we really don't care. In fact, we like it, prefer. Put it this way, if we were our there in the wild we'd have to fend for ourselves, and either get eaten by our predators, or die of disease or old age. At least you kill us quickly. You don't even extend that dignity to your own kind, nope, you let each other, sometimes even force each other, to suffer till the very last breath and extract as much economic value out of each other as you can via the 'health care system' and 'palliative care', and then you don't even have the dignity to eat, or otherwise recycle, the carcass, no you just bury it in cemeteries where you don't grow food, or worse yet burn them, whereby the worms can't even eat them, and worsen your carbon pollution problem." And there ya go, absurd isn't it. I certainly think so. I live near pasture, we walk the dogs through it, the cows that hang out there are protective of their young, and definitely appear to have something going on between their eyes, they're quite adorable, both the young and old, and recently they're no longer there. Perhaps they got moved, perhaps we've eaten them. They could very well have ended up on my plate and I wouldn't know. But at least their lives had meaning and purpose, which is more than I can say for my life at times. The only reason I won't eat my dogs is through some quirt of culture that causes me think doing so is weird. > Or, because you're right and you know it, ignore the entirety of this post. Absolutely. If all we have is opinion, let's go with mine, because I guarantee it's stronger than yours. I'm even willing to go to war over it. Well, not me personally, I prefer baths and hot cups of tea, but we do seem quite eager to send each others children off to war. I'm trying to be facetious here, because I don't really understand why people bother to keep having these arguments over differences of opinion. It generally doesn't work, unless someone is almost already there but hasn't quite accepted that they agree with you. As Amezarak suggest in the last paragraph, perhaps the best way to go about changing culture is to attempt to gradually shift the Overton window[1], because right now the idea of Vegetarian or Vegan as policy or law is very much in the 'Unthinkable' stage. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

dang 10y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12026276 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12026276 and marked it off-topic.