4 ms·
It depends on the maturity of the field. In the 1800s? Absolutely. Animal rights are behind that of humans in the 1800s (yes I know human slavery was common at
by JCharante 3y ago
It depends on the maturity of the field. In the 1800s? Absolutely. Animal rights are behind that of humans in the 1800s (yes I know human slavery was common at that time, and that’s my point, humans were treated as property and not as people with rights, which is how our legal frameworks view non-human animals now)
- behringer 3y agoNo reasonable scientist would have been murdering people in the 1800s...
- TeMPOraL 3y agoI doubt there were many "reasonable scientists" in the 1800s.
- magicalhippo 3y agoSure, you get someone else to do that[1]. Don't ask, don't tell of course. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burke_and_Hare_murders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burke_and_Hare_murders
- rsynnott 3y agoI have… bad news: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burke_and_Hare_murders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burke_and_Hare_murders Rule of thumb, when dealing with the 19th century: assume pretty much any level of cruelty, depravity, or plain stupidity was up for grabs (you have all three here, the stupidity being around the laws which made this industry inevitable). It wasn’t a very nice time, in general.
- lynx23 3y agoThat is a pretty naiv assumption.
- behringer 3y agoCongrats you found one example. I could probably list a dozen from recent times too.