5 ms·

All animals are in one way or another a food source for other animals. It is in no way evil if an animal suffers unless that suffering is intentionally caused b

by thret 16y ago

All animals are in one way or another a food source for other animals. It is in no way evil if an animal suffers unless that suffering is intentionally caused by a human. Our sin is in the mass production and mis-treatment of livestock while they are alive, not in the actual killing or eating. Not eating mass-produced chicken or wearing leather makes sense, refusing free-range eggs or seafood does not. Not that there can be any real debate over an issue that predominately comes down to personal opinion. Always better to do what you are comfortable with and allow others to do the same.

fleitz 16y ago
You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Since you posit that huamn beings can infer the feelings of animals I posit that animals prefer to be factory farmed than spend what existence the animal has being constantly chased by predators. Therefore wearing leather and eating mass-produced chicken makes perfect sense and is in tune with the feelings of the animal.
- pyre 16y ago
  > You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. > No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Does the lack of knowledge of their living preferences somehow bolster the argument that it's ok to factory-farm them though?
  - elblanco 16y ago
    You can't make the decision one way or the other. "Monks, these two extremes ought not to be practiced by one who has gone forth from the household life. (What are the two?) There is addiction to indulgence of sense-pleasures, which is low, coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to self-mortification, which is painful, unworthy, and unprofitable. Avoiding both these extremes, the Tathagata (the Perfect One) has realized the Middle Path; it gives vision, gives knowledge, and leads to calm, to insight, to enlightenment and to Nibbana. And what is that Middle Path realized by the Tathagata...? It is the Noble Eightfold path, and nothing else, namely: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration." - Siddhārtha Gautama, Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
- rflrob 16y ago
  While we can't be sure to of the preferences of livestock, we can make pretty good guesses. If the responses of animals in a factory farm are more similar to the responses of an animal that is being injured than an animal that is not being interacted with, then the posterior probability of the factory farm situation being dis-preferred by the animal is reasonably high. Factory farming or "wild" existence is a false dichotomy. There is the option of having pastured animals. And, critically, there is the option of not existing at all. Furthermore, I'd suggest that domesticated animals are different enough from their wild forebears that spending their existence being chased by predators isn't the default "non-factory farm" option. From what I know of factory farms, pastured animal husbandry, and the probable preference functions of animals, I would guess the preferences would be: pasturing > non-existence > factory farm largely from The Omnivore's Dilemma, by Michael Pollan
- Evgeny 16y ago
  No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. But does anyone know, without any doubt, the living preferences of a potato or an apple tree?
- cjbprime 16y ago
  > You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Can you infer the feelings of other humans? If you're willing to accept human communication like speech to answer "no, I don't need to", but are unwilling to accept communication like adult cows being willing to go through physical pain in order to stay with their calves when the calves are being taken away, I think you have a speciesist arbitrary-line problem going on here.
- Xodarap 16y ago
  We can make some guesses. See e.g. http://philosophyforprogrammers.blogspot.com/2010/11/who-feels-pain.html http://philosophyforprogrammers.blogspot.com/2010/11/who-fee...
pyre 16y ago
> free-range eggs or seafood does not Personally: 1. Eating seafood supports the over-fishing of our water-ways. 2. The 'free-range' label, IIRC, only requires that the animals have 15 minutes of time outside of their cramped cages. It's not a huge improvement. 3. In general, when they are hatching new chickens for egg-laying they sort out all of the male chicks and then kill them. Industry-standard practice is to put them into garbage bags and suffocate them, or to toss them (in garbage bags) into a wood-chipper. 4. Egg-laying hens are only kept alive as long as their production is at a certain level. As soon as it drops below a certain level they are called 'spent hens,' and killed.

by thret 16y ago

fleitz 16y ago

You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Since you posit that huamn beings can infer the feelings of animals I posit that animals prefer to be factory farmed than spend what existence the animal has being constantly chased by predators. Therefore wearing leather and eating mass-produced chicken makes perfect sense and is in tune with the feelings of the animal.

pyre 16y ago
> You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. > No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Does the lack of knowledge of their living preferences somehow bolster the argument that it's ok to factory-farm them though?
- elblanco 16y ago
  You can't make the decision one way or the other. "Monks, these two extremes ought not to be practiced by one who has gone forth from the household life. (What are the two?) There is addiction to indulgence of sense-pleasures, which is low, coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to self-mortification, which is painful, unworthy, and unprofitable. Avoiding both these extremes, the Tathagata (the Perfect One) has realized the Middle Path; it gives vision, gives knowledge, and leads to calm, to insight, to enlightenment and to Nibbana. And what is that Middle Path realized by the Tathagata...? It is the Noble Eightfold path, and nothing else, namely: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration." - Siddhārtha Gautama, Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
rflrob 16y ago
While we can't be sure to of the preferences of livestock, we can make pretty good guesses. If the responses of animals in a factory farm are more similar to the responses of an animal that is being injured than an animal that is not being interacted with, then the posterior probability of the factory farm situation being dis-preferred by the animal is reasonably high. Factory farming or "wild" existence is a false dichotomy. There is the option of having pastured animals. And, critically, there is the option of not existing at all. Furthermore, I'd suggest that domesticated animals are different enough from their wild forebears that spending their existence being chased by predators isn't the default "non-factory farm" option. From what I know of factory farms, pastured animal husbandry, and the probable preference functions of animals, I would guess the preferences would be: pasturing > non-existence > factory farm largely from The Omnivore's Dilemma, by Michael Pollan
Evgeny 16y ago
No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. But does anyone know, without any doubt, the living preferences of a potato or an apple tree?
cjbprime 16y ago
> You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Can you infer the feelings of other humans? If you're willing to accept human communication like speech to answer "no, I don't need to", but are unwilling to accept communication like adult cows being willing to go through physical pain in order to stay with their calves when the calves are being taken away, I think you have a speciesist arbitrary-line problem going on here.
Xodarap 16y ago
We can make some guesses. See e.g. http://philosophyforprogrammers.blogspot.com/2010/11/who-feels-pain.html http://philosophyforprogrammers.blogspot.com/2010/11/who-fee...

pyre 16y ago

> free-range eggs or seafood does not Personally: 1. Eating seafood supports the over-fishing of our water-ways. 2. The 'free-range' label, IIRC, only requires that the animals have 15 minutes of time outside of their cramped cages. It's not a huge improvement. 3. In general, when they are hatching new chickens for egg-laying they sort out all of the male chicks and then kill them. Industry-standard practice is to put them into garbage bags and suffocate them, or to toss them (in garbage bags) into a wood-chipper. 4. Egg-laying hens are only kept alive as long as their production is at a certain level. As soon as it drops below a certain level they are called 'spent hens,' and killed.