4 ms·

> But I also recognize that a lot of people just don't have any kind of emotional response to this sort of thing, and that's ok too I will guarantee that a mas

by grecy 6y ago

> But I also recognize that a lot of people just don't have any kind of emotional response to this sort of thing, and that's ok too I will guarantee that a massive percentage of people do in fact have a very strong emotional response to this kind of thing, but it's all just "out of sight, out of mind". If you make people be involved in the killing of millions of baby chicks, they'll suddenly care very, very much. Our modern world is doing thousands of thousands of utterly horrible things each and every day, we just don't get to see it or be involved, and we're way too busy making our next mortgage payment and getting the kids to school on time to notice.

WillPostForFood 6y ago
If you make people be involved in the killing of millions of baby chicks, they'll suddenly care very, very much. For a few days, then they'll get used to like the 1000 previous generations of humans that had to kill animals to survive.
- grecy 6y ago
  > like the 1000 previous generations of humans that had to kill animals to survive Just a couple of hundred years ago there wouldn't have been many people killing more animals than they could eat.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - technothrasher 6y ago
    https://www.businessinsider.com/giant-ancient-animal-traps-2016-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/giant-ancient-animal-traps-2...
hunter-gatherer 6y ago
> I will guarantee that a massive percentage of people do in fact have a very strong emotional response to this kind of thing, but it's all just "out of sight, out of mind". Interesting you hold such expectations. Based on my dealings with people I don't think a lasting response would be that great. Empathy and morals seem to suffice while it is convenient, but when necessary people always take the path of least resistance.
perl4ever 6y ago
What about medical research and testing? Per individual animal, that seems generally much worse, although I don't know how the global scale/numbers compare and how to morally weigh quantity of suffering vs. quality.
sempron64 6y ago
For all of history until 100 years ago, and even now in about half of the world, poultry was purchased in live markets. The vast majority of the population did not/does not flinch to see their poultry slaughtered after seeing it a few times. For humans, generally, Eating takes priority over empathy to animals. Therefore I doubt it would be different if we were involved in the slaughter of our food. I suspect even if the all people were taken to tour agricultural facilities, the majority would accept the cost.

by grecy 6y ago

WillPostForFood 6y ago

If you make people be involved in the killing of millions of baby chicks, they'll suddenly care very, very much. For a few days, then they'll get used to like the 1000 previous generations of humans that had to kill animals to survive.

grecy 6y ago
> like the 1000 previous generations of humans that had to kill animals to survive Just a couple of hundred years ago there wouldn't have been many people killing more animals than they could eat.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- technothrasher 6y ago
  https://www.businessinsider.com/giant-ancient-animal-traps-2016-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/giant-ancient-animal-traps-2...

hunter-gatherer 6y ago

> I will guarantee that a massive percentage of people do in fact have a very strong emotional response to this kind of thing, but it's all just "out of sight, out of mind". Interesting you hold such expectations. Based on my dealings with people I don't think a lasting response would be that great. Empathy and morals seem to suffice while it is convenient, but when necessary people always take the path of least resistance.

perl4ever 6y ago

What about medical research and testing? Per individual animal, that seems generally much worse, although I don't know how the global scale/numbers compare and how to morally weigh quantity of suffering vs. quality.

sempron64 6y ago

For all of history until 100 years ago, and even now in about half of the world, poultry was purchased in live markets. The vast majority of the population did not/does not flinch to see their poultry slaughtered after seeing it a few times. For humans, generally, Eating takes priority over empathy to animals. Therefore I doubt it would be different if we were involved in the slaughter of our food. I suspect even if the all people were taken to tour agricultural facilities, the majority would accept the cost.