3 ms·

Is there a quality of life tipping point at which you would rather never have been born? If you were offered a life consisting entirely of pain and suffering, w

by dotsam 5y ago

Is there a quality of life tipping point at which you would rather never have been born? If you were offered a life consisting entirely of pain and suffering, would you accept that? If the quality of life is *not* an issue, we could logically maintain that we are morally obliged to maximise the number of beings brought into life -- however short and horrible that life may be -- because any form of existence is preferable to non-existence. If quality of life *is* an issue, we should strive not to bring beings into existence that are likely to have a particularly low quality of life. The suffering of factory farmed animals may be great enough to say it would be better that they never existed rather than they were born into a short life of imprisonment and suffering.

roenxi 5y ago
The compromise position then would be to breed them so they didn't suffer. It'd probably be good for the meat quality too. The idea there is a moral issue here is suspect. It is obvious I, personally, don't want to be factory farmed. It isn't obvious that factory farming is a moral problem. It is all moot anyway, vat-grown meat is going to be more hygienic, cheaper and all-round better once they work out the kinks. But it might result in the near or total extinction of cattle.
- dotsam 5y ago
  I hope cellular agriculture will help reduce real meat consumption, and decrease overall suffering. Breeding out the ability to suffer is also desirable. Do you not think that factory farming causes suffering? Causing avoidable suffering seems like a moral issue to me.
  - roenxi 5y ago
    I, personally, do not care if factory farming causes suffering and support cheap, nutritious and convenient food by whatever means is necessary. The people who want to ban it are insensitive threats to human comfort IMHO. But if it is a problem that needs to be solved, breeding the animals to enjoy it is a much easier solution than synthetic meat. We've had the technology to change animal behaviour through breeding for longer than we've had history. If people want them to get a kick out of being caged and slaughtered then that is doable. easier and would have been faster to accomplish than growing meat in a jar, anyway. I think it is a waste of time, but it is better than laws restricting food production.

by dotsam 5y ago

roenxi 5y ago

The compromise position then would be to breed them so they didn't suffer. It'd probably be good for the meat quality too. The idea there is a moral issue here is suspect. It is obvious I, personally, don't want to be factory farmed. It isn't obvious that factory farming is a moral problem. It is all moot anyway, vat-grown meat is going to be more hygienic, cheaper and all-round better once they work out the kinks. But it might result in the near or total extinction of cattle.

dotsam 5y ago
I hope cellular agriculture will help reduce real meat consumption, and decrease overall suffering. Breeding out the ability to suffer is also desirable. Do you not think that factory farming causes suffering? Causing avoidable suffering seems like a moral issue to me.
- roenxi 5y ago
  I, personally, do not care if factory farming causes suffering and support cheap, nutritious and convenient food by whatever means is necessary. The people who want to ban it are insensitive threats to human comfort IMHO. But if it is a problem that needs to be solved, breeding the animals to enjoy it is a much easier solution than synthetic meat. We've had the technology to change animal behaviour through breeding for longer than we've had history. If people want them to get a kick out of being caged and slaughtered then that is doable. easier and would have been faster to accomplish than growing meat in a jar, anyway. I think it is a waste of time, but it is better than laws restricting food production.