4 ms·
it can be used to declare anyone/everything non-sentient So what? My concern in this thread is that we collectively are holding on to the thread of terms of va
by wruza 4y ago
it can be used to declare anyone/everything non-sentient
So what? My concern in this thread is that we collectively are holding on to the thread of terms of vague binary phenomena, which were never stressed before and are most likely a randomly emerged self-petting.
All of that only has meaning in a context of our species. If you’re fine with something begging for help or expressing fear etc by knowing it has no underlying mechanism like yours to do that, that’s it. We rate things by implied similarity (in case someone still hasn’t figure it out) and if something is much different, that’s the matter of agreement, not of absolute meaning.
- cycomanic 4y agoYou are aware of the historical precedents what happened when declaring people non-sentient?
- wruza 4y agoNot sure if we need historical precedents with farms full of pretty smart and feeling animals, which are much closer to our arrangement than a completely different model. But I don’t talk ethics here, only the status quo. We are the predators in power, and only we can decide if something is sentient and/or feeling and/or have rights. It doesn’t mean that we should decide in a way that you think is horrific. The key point is that there is no absolute truth and only how we collectively are thinking (partly by nature’s design, partly by social standards) will define how it will be. No one will judge us except ourselves. (Turned out a little hard for me to express it clearly, I hope it makes at least some sense)