7 ms·
The argument isn't primarily a quantitative one. It's asking what it says about the so-called life sciences that they are based on torturing living beings.
by badcede 7y ago
The argument isn't primarily a quantitative one. It's asking what it says about the so-called life sciences that they are based on torturing living beings.
- markdown 7y agoMice aren't "beings".
- badcede 7y agoThen who is?
- pochamago 7y agoHumans. I confess, I have no ability to understand the powerful empathy people feel for rodents. I really feel nothing for them.
- warent 7y agoThe point is mice are life forms. Who are we as humans to decide what that means for them?
- markdown 7y ago> Who are we as humans to decide what that means for them? Is that a joke? Rats, cockroaches, and mosquitoes are all life forms. Poison ivy is a life form. Guinea worms are life forms. We as intelligent beings get to decide what it all means. We can crush them, we can use them to our advancement, or we can set them up as gods and worship them. But none of those things are beings. It's our language, and we , not mice, get to decide what the word "being" means.
- warent 7y agoIt's not a joke. It's a frank question. We might decide what the word "being" means to us, but that doesn't change the reality of what the word is pointing to.
- sls 7y agoNoun being (countable and uncountable, plural beings) A living creature.
- markdown 7y agoNope. That's not how it's defined. A guinea worm is also a living creature, as is a mosquito, but they aren't beings. Beings is used to refer to intelligent life.
- s1artibartfast 7y ago>It's asking what it says about the so-called life sciences that they are based on torturing living beings. I think it says more about the observer than life sciences. Morality in the real world is complex and most of the heuristics we use in our daily lives rapidly break down when examining most anything in detail. While life sciences have a tremendous potential to help humans and the world at large, but there are also hidden costs that laypeople may not be aware of.
- vlan0 7y ago>Morality in the real world is complex and most of the heuristics we use in our daily lives rapidly break down when examining most anything in detail. Not exactly. We have tools to examine the validity and soundness of arguments people use when they make a claim about morality.
- s1artibartfast 7y agoIm not sure we are in disagreement. We do have some good tools to examine arguments. Most tools to judge moral frameworks are relatively poor. Most of the heuristics people use in their daily were learned from Disney and are garbage.
- vlan0 7y agoThanks for the clarification. I see where you're coming from.