> "I am arguing that if pigs were more intelligent than we are they would do to us exactly what we do to them, including keeping us in farms to eat later etc."

> "I am arguing that if pigs were more intelligent than we are they would do to us exactly what we do to them, including keeping us in farms to eat later etc." I don't think this is necessarily true. Throughout our own history humanity has done things we regret and decided were wrong (or are actively fighting against). Slavery, genocide, kings, torture - while struggling towards more just societies based on rule of law and more democratic government. It's quite possible that raising and killing other animals with lots of suffering is something we will regret. It's quite possible that another imaginary species of hyper-intelligent pigs would reach the same conclusion. > "Most animals, particularly pigs, would get eaten by something anyway. By not eating them we are not reducing suffering, we are simply shifting the blame." This is a different argument. Just because other animals that are not humans and don't have the capacity for choice would eat a pig, doesn't mean that humanity contributing to this suffering is the same. I'd also argue we do it at such a scale that it's much worse.