7 ms·
It is fascinating. But I always get uncomfortable reading stuff like this... I mean, they are placing sensors in a turtle’s brain, physically immobilizing it, a
by FPGAhacker 6y ago
It is fascinating. But I always get uncomfortable reading stuff like this... I mean, they are placing sensors in a turtle’s brain, physically immobilizing it, aiming its head at a screen for a while, and you generally don’t release something to the wild after that. The ethical thing is considered to be killing it.
I get that there are a lot of aspects to modern life that sterilize the gruesomeness of reality. Still makes me uncomfortable when the illusion is peeled back and I catch a glimpse.
- roamerz 6y agoAgreed. To put into another context if someone were to try this on my Boxer dog , an arguably similar entity, I would protect her with my life if need be. Given that while I am fascinated with such information I will have to come down on the side of the turtle.
- jsrcout 6y agoI feel you. I made the mistake of looking up a paper on vision in cats once. Once was enough.
- whowe1 6y agoDo you eat meat?
- wombatmobile 6y agoIt is possible to eat meat and to value and respect animals. It requires the holding of two paradigms simultaneously. These paradigms are not incompatible or necessarily in conflict with each other. Paradigm 1. Animals are awesome. Wanton killing is wrong. Paradigm 2. Killing animals for food is OK provided the animal is killed humanely, the food is not wasted, and the animal is revered for its contribution. Most people are able to do this. Some of them get lazy with the part about reverence, because the supermarket puts animals and the life cycle process out of sight and out of mind, hence there are few triggers for reverence. Similarly, it is possible to use animals for scientific research and to value and respect animals. It requires the holding of two paradigms simultaneously. These paradigms are more difficult to state than in the case of carnivorous food above.
- nefitty 6y agoAnimals don’t “contribute”. That implies some act of conscious sacrifice on the part of the animal. Those two paradigms can be boiled down to “Animals are pretty objects that I can kill and eat if I so desire.” It’s the polar opposite of reverence.
- wombatmobile 6y agoYou can boil paradigms down into whatever you like. What you say I think and feel is not an accurate representation of what I think and feel. It is an indication of what you think and feel.
- nefitty 6y agoIf that’s your response then what’s the point of trying to rationalize your meat eating? If you like meat that comes from animals that are unnecessarily killed then that’s your prerogative, but don’t try to dress it up in spiritual terms like “reverence”.
- SunlightEdge 6y agoMost people eat meat because they like the taste. It's way less ethical than scientific research into the visual systems of turtles. And the majority of animal research is on pre-clinical treatments for human diseases. I've always been amazed at how animal rights activists target scientists over the animal farming industry.
- PretzelPirate 6y agoAnimal rights activists regularly target both. They even go as far as doing sit ins in slaughter facilities to show how gruesome and cruel they are to the animals.
- SunlightEdge 6y ago
- signaru 6y agowhile we're at it, don't make the mistake of image searching the author's name.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]