6 ms·

I agree with this take. Chimps kill and eat smaller monkeys all the time. If you watch any nature documentary you can see how ruthless animals are as it's all a

by gerash 5y ago

I agree with this take. Chimps kill and eat smaller monkeys all the time. If you watch any nature documentary you can see how ruthless animals are as it's all a survival game after all. I'm no biologist but the empathy / sympathy part also seems to be an evolved trait. It should bring stability to a social group and reduce injuries due to needless in-fighting which effectively ensures better survival as a group.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Sporktacular 5y ago
"It should bring stability to a social group and reduce injuries due to needless in-fighting which effectively ensures better survival as a group." That's probably how it started, but the definition of social group expanded as we came to realise how arbitrary and culturally determined social group boundaries are. Once we account for those biases, and start to see all animals as just trying to survive in the world, it's a natural progression to extend that empathy to them too.
- gerash 5y ago
  Including all living creatures isn't quite useful in terms of survival chances. Thinking about this topic, we could also philosophize the whole "torture" aspect. Presumably it means physical pain to an animal which many feel uneasy about. But if you think about it, pain, as signals to the brain are also evolved mechanisms in order to survive. Pain is a crude signal indicating that the life of that animal is in danger but they are not perfect indicators. If pain signals were more accurate they would activate the moment an animal approaches a human with a shotgun similar to how you feel pain touching boiling water. But the pain mechanism hasn't become that sophisticated yet. So even the pain is an arbitrary crude mechanism so real "torture" would be loss of habitat for example but animals won't feel that as pain.

6 ms·

I agree with this take. Chimps kill and eat smaller monkeys all the time. If you watch any nature documentary you can see how ruthless animals are as it's all a

by gerash 5y ago

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Sporktacular 5y ago
"It should bring stability to a social group and reduce injuries due to needless in-fighting which effectively ensures better survival as a group." That's probably how it started, but the definition of social group expanded as we came to realise how arbitrary and culturally determined social group boundaries are. Once we account for those biases, and start to see all animals as just trying to survive in the world, it's a natural progression to extend that empathy to them too.
- gerash 5y ago
  Including all living creatures isn't quite useful in terms of survival chances. Thinking about this topic, we could also philosophize the whole "torture" aspect. Presumably it means physical pain to an animal which many feel uneasy about. But if you think about it, pain, as signals to the brain are also evolved mechanisms in order to survive. Pain is a crude signal indicating that the life of that animal is in danger but they are not perfect indicators. If pain signals were more accurate they would activate the moment an animal approaches a human with a shotgun similar to how you feel pain touching boiling water. But the pain mechanism hasn't become that sophisticated yet. So even the pain is an arbitrary crude mechanism so real "torture" would be loss of habitat for example but animals won't feel that as pain.