5 ms·

In the AC/DC wars Edison fought with Tesla, he'd electrocute animals to show how dangerous AC was. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/thomas-edison-histo

In the AC/DC wars Edison fought with Tesla, he'd electrocute animals to show how dangerous AC was. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/thomas-edison-history-electrocuting-dogs-horses-people-article-1.2969425 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/thomas-edison-histo...

WalterBright 9y ago
That's more of an indication of how our modern sensibilities have changed. When I was a kid I was taken to the local zoo, where lions were displayed in small, bare concrete cages. I felt sorry for them, and did not enjoy the trip. But that doesn't mean the zookeepers were bad people, people just thought differently about animals in those days.
- rxhernandez 9y ago
  You're right, it really is too difficult to live and let live. It's really too difficult to think, is everyone benefitting all that much from the pain I'm inflecting on whatever I'm hurting. Please, these are adults that knew what they were doing and that the pain they were causing didn't satisfy some need, but some want. If you don't want to go down in history as an asshole, don't be a dick when you or your tribe are only benefitting beyond basic needs and necessities.
  - MaxBarraclough 9y ago
    > these are adults that knew what they were doing Not so. Mainstream attitudes on whether animal are even capable of suffering, have changed radically. > that the pain they were causing didn't satisfy some need, but some want It seems more likely that the poor conditions were because of underfunding, than sadism.
  - klum 9y ago
    A lot of people are okay with testing things like drugs on animals. You can at least imagine a scenario where Edison was driven by concern for public welfare, thinking the higher voltage used by Tesla was going to cause disasters and trying to make people aware of the danger.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
pvaldes 9y ago
And electrocution is seen currently as the method of choice in all modern slaughterhouses of the planet to kill humanely animals for meat, instantly and saving a lot of this nervous excitation called pain. Edison has saved more animal pain than the whole Peta team probably.
- andai 9y ago
  How would you respond if I electrocuted you, saying my intention was to save you from pain?
  - wallace_f 9y ago
    I've seen this thinking before: So the moral question is, 'if we can give animals (1) artificial/unnatural, but (2) reasonably enjoyable, and (3) relatively pain free,' for (4) some benefit to the machine of society, is that just? Interestingly, many modern liberal thinkers say no, but when this same moral questioning is applied to humans, you run into what the anti-liberal terrorist Ted Kraczynski was arguing about. In other words, as of now you and I both live and probably work in society, sacrificing our natural freedom and state in nature to enjoy comforts and safety of our technological civilization; and yes, to die in a hospital rather than in nature. Anyways I'm not suggesting any answers, just juxtaposing the same ideas applied unequally, which suggests an implicit collective answer of 'yes'to your question; or at least a tolerance to that answer. And it's unfortunately partially unworldly thinking about these social contracts anyways: in the real world, farms are still grossly mistreating animals, as does civilization to people, where outcomes stem too often from money and violence; not always from social contracts / commitments to morals--which brings us full circle to the life of Tesla and his struggles with bullying.
  - syockit 9y ago
    You might as well have asked "how would you respond if I gave you lethal injection while you were sleeping?" What's the point of the question?
  - pvaldes 9y ago
    I would be fuming if somebody electrocute me, that's for sure; but much better than if they kill me with a rusty axe. That would be very impolite and unforgeivable.

WalterBright 9y ago

That's more of an indication of how our modern sensibilities have changed. When I was a kid I was taken to the local zoo, where lions were displayed in small, bare concrete cages. I felt sorry for them, and did not enjoy the trip. But that doesn't mean the zookeepers were bad people, people just thought differently about animals in those days.

rxhernandez 9y ago
You're right, it really is too difficult to live and let live. It's really too difficult to think, is everyone benefitting all that much from the pain I'm inflecting on whatever I'm hurting. Please, these are adults that knew what they were doing and that the pain they were causing didn't satisfy some need, but some want. If you don't want to go down in history as an asshole, don't be a dick when you or your tribe are only benefitting beyond basic needs and necessities.
- MaxBarraclough 9y ago
  > these are adults that knew what they were doing Not so. Mainstream attitudes on whether animal are even capable of suffering, have changed radically. > that the pain they were causing didn't satisfy some need, but some want It seems more likely that the poor conditions were because of underfunding, than sadism.
- klum 9y ago
  A lot of people are okay with testing things like drugs on animals. You can at least imagine a scenario where Edison was driven by concern for public welfare, thinking the higher voltage used by Tesla was going to cause disasters and trying to make people aware of the danger.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

pvaldes 9y ago

And electrocution is seen currently as the method of choice in all modern slaughterhouses of the planet to kill humanely animals for meat, instantly and saving a lot of this nervous excitation called pain. Edison has saved more animal pain than the whole Peta team probably.

andai 9y ago
How would you respond if I electrocuted you, saying my intention was to save you from pain?
- wallace_f 9y ago
  I've seen this thinking before: So the moral question is, 'if we can give animals (1) artificial/unnatural, but (2) reasonably enjoyable, and (3) relatively pain free,' for (4) some benefit to the machine of society, is that just? Interestingly, many modern liberal thinkers say no, but when this same moral questioning is applied to humans, you run into what the anti-liberal terrorist Ted Kraczynski was arguing about. In other words, as of now you and I both live and probably work in society, sacrificing our natural freedom and state in nature to enjoy comforts and safety of our technological civilization; and yes, to die in a hospital rather than in nature. Anyways I'm not suggesting any answers, just juxtaposing the same ideas applied unequally, which suggests an implicit collective answer of 'yes'to your question; or at least a tolerance to that answer. And it's unfortunately partially unworldly thinking about these social contracts anyways: in the real world, farms are still grossly mistreating animals, as does civilization to people, where outcomes stem too often from money and violence; not always from social contracts / commitments to morals--which brings us full circle to the life of Tesla and his struggles with bullying.
- syockit 9y ago
  You might as well have asked "how would you respond if I gave you lethal injection while you were sleeping?" What's the point of the question?
- pvaldes 9y ago
  I would be fuming if somebody electrocute me, that's for sure; but much better than if they kill me with a rusty axe. That would be very impolite and unforgeivable.