3 ms·

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 d

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
  - vasilipupkin 10y ago
    Sorry, you are losing me. You on the one hand claim that animals feel pain similarly to humans and in general that animals are similar to humans , yet on the other hand say that it's ok to eat meat because it's tasty, despite the your own claim that eating meat will cause those animals pain ? That seems like a bankrupt moral philosophy. I don't think animals feel anything like what humans feel, which is why I think it's ok to eat meat. But certainly if I'm ever proven wrong, that would be reason enough to stop eating meat. I also don't think the parallel with cheap clothes or mining practices works. I mean with meat you can simply stop eating it with relatively little effort on your part. With clothes or products it is simply not realistic to try to avoid all poorly produced products on the shelf

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
- vasilipupkin 10y ago
  Sorry, you are losing me. You on the one hand claim that animals feel pain similarly to humans and in general that animals are similar to humans , yet on the other hand say that it's ok to eat meat because it's tasty, despite the your own claim that eating meat will cause those animals pain ? That seems like a bankrupt moral philosophy. I don't think animals feel anything like what humans feel, which is why I think it's ok to eat meat. But certainly if I'm ever proven wrong, that would be reason enough to stop eating meat. I also don't think the parallel with cheap clothes or mining practices works. I mean with meat you can simply stop eating it with relatively little effort on your part. With clothes or products it is simply not realistic to try to avoid all poorly produced products on the shelf