5 ms·

Our ancestors didn’t abuse animals on the scale we do now.

adolph 3y ago
Ancient cheeses might have abused a larger variety of species given regional variations in prokaryotes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9792889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9792889/
ars 3y ago
Ancient people did not see animals are beings with feeling, they were seen as useful production machines. It's only in modern times that we have the luxury of taking the animal's feeling into account at all. I'm sure you would want even more consideration for the animals, but it's much better today than it was.
- peterashford 3y ago
  How do you know that "ancient people" never thought of animals as having feelings? Seems an extraordinarily broad claim given all the cultures and ages that encompass "ancient people"
  - ars 3y ago
    Because I read some of their writings? The concept of a "Pet" was foreign to them. Animals - even dogs, were there to work. The concept of how an animal was feeling simply didn't occur to them. An animal was a tool, and you took good care of the tool, but not because of the tool, but because then it was more useful. It was the 18th century when animal rights started becoming a thing, which exactly corresponds with the industrial age when things became less scarce and people could worry about animals, and not just themselves.
    - eszed 3y ago
      "Some of", indeed. The poster above is correct that your statements are over-broad. There are hundreds of Roman monuments, inscriptions, and poems [celebrating dogs](https://thepetrifiedmuse.blog/2015/06/20/every-dog-has-his-day/ https://thepetrifiedmuse.blog/2015/06/20/every-dog-has-his-d...) as companions and pets. There are medieval European graves that strongly suggest sentimentality towards the animals buried in them. There's this [lovely ninth-century Irish poem](https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/48267/pangur-ban https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/48267/...) about a cat. Someone with more knowledge in the area than I possess should comment on animal portraiture in ancient and early-modern China and Japan, but that was a thing as well. I think the fairest thing to say is that people in every era - very much including today - instrumentalize some animals, and sentimentalize others.
    - asimovfan 3y ago
      Buddhism even back then 2500 years ago was very conscious of all that.
    - defrost 3y ago
      You read some writing by some "ancient" people (post writing 'ancient it seems) and you're launching into broad sweeping generalisations about all "ancient people" ? Wow. Meanwhile, I've travelled a lot for work - mostly to odd corners of the world, and I've yet to meet people that didn't have stories about animals and animal behaviours. Famously, for example, Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime stories are largely about animals, Tiddalick the Frog, Emu and the Jabiru, etc. They encapsulate the place of animals in the environment, and as hunter gatherers attuned to where next years meal will come from, attention is paid to breeding and caring for the young so that there are full grown adults to breed again and to eat. Rightly or wrongly the stories are about the imagined feelings of animals, the things that make them happy and plentiful, the bad things that cause numbers to dwindle. Various people had various relationships with various animals, not as "pets" but as other beings in the world. For example: Ngarritj - the Yolngu speaking bird https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbSxc6Y1aVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbSxc6Y1aVA
    - peterashford 3y ago
      some != "all people across all cultures for all time"
  - sensanaty 3y ago
    I mean even my own currently-alive ancestors (farmers, the majority of them) don't look at livestock as living, conscious beings. They obviously care for each animal and give them a swift and as-painless-as-possible butchering when the time comes, but they're not the bleeding hearts that many people these days are, they're mostly just vehicles for vital necessities. I don't find it difficult to imagine my great-great-great-great-(fill in the appropriate number of greats here to qualify for ancient ancestors) grandmother butchering a pig and not really giving it a second thought at all, having grown up on a farm myself. Hell, my current grandma is probably much gentler and gives the pork a much better time than my ancient ancestors did
    - AlecSchueler 3y ago
      I think it's a mistake to look at cultural trends across the last century and to extrapolate from there without any broader research.
- FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
  "A wise person does not kill any living being." - Mahavira, 6th century BC (Translated, of course.)
  - pvaldes 3y ago
    We can easily conclude that Mahavira was either a dumb person, or an hypocritical one, 21th century AD.
LemmyInThePub 3y ago
> Our ancestors didn’t abuse animals on the scale we do now. It's sad this type of trolling is becoming tolerated on HN.
- corinroyal 3y ago
  How is this trolling? The development of factory farms where living creatures are so inhumanely mistreated at scale is a very recent development.
  - j33zusjuice 3y ago
    They probably misunderstood scale to mean something like “in the ways,” not more literally “by the numbers.” I’ve seen people suggest that we’re more savage and brutal towards animals these days on other websites, and I think that’s an absurd conclusion to draw because I don’t think we have sufficient evidence for it. It seems unquestionable that we’re doing it to more animals, though. There are more people eating far more animals these days. I suppose some might argue they aren’t suffering or something? That’s crazy, to me.

Ancient cheeses might have abused a larger variety of species given regional variations in prokaryotes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9792889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9792889/

ars 3y ago

Ancient people did not see animals are beings with feeling, they were seen as useful production machines. It's only in modern times that we have the luxury of taking the animal's feeling into account at all. I'm sure you would want even more consideration for the animals, but it's much better today than it was.

peterashford 3y ago
How do you know that "ancient people" never thought of animals as having feelings? Seems an extraordinarily broad claim given all the cultures and ages that encompass "ancient people"
- ars 3y ago
  Because I read some of their writings? The concept of a "Pet" was foreign to them. Animals - even dogs, were there to work. The concept of how an animal was feeling simply didn't occur to them. An animal was a tool, and you took good care of the tool, but not because of the tool, but because then it was more useful. It was the 18th century when animal rights started becoming a thing, which exactly corresponds with the industrial age when things became less scarce and people could worry about animals, and not just themselves.
  - eszed 3y ago
    "Some of", indeed. The poster above is correct that your statements are over-broad. There are hundreds of Roman monuments, inscriptions, and poems [celebrating dogs](https://thepetrifiedmuse.blog/2015/06/20/every-dog-has-his-day/ https://thepetrifiedmuse.blog/2015/06/20/every-dog-has-his-d...) as companions and pets. There are medieval European graves that strongly suggest sentimentality towards the animals buried in them. There's this [lovely ninth-century Irish poem](https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/48267/pangur-ban https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/48267/...) about a cat. Someone with more knowledge in the area than I possess should comment on animal portraiture in ancient and early-modern China and Japan, but that was a thing as well. I think the fairest thing to say is that people in every era - very much including today - instrumentalize some animals, and sentimentalize others.
  - asimovfan 3y ago
    Buddhism even back then 2500 years ago was very conscious of all that.
  - defrost 3y ago
    You read some writing by some "ancient" people (post writing 'ancient it seems) and you're launching into broad sweeping generalisations about all "ancient people" ? Wow. Meanwhile, I've travelled a lot for work - mostly to odd corners of the world, and I've yet to meet people that didn't have stories about animals and animal behaviours. Famously, for example, Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime stories are largely about animals, Tiddalick the Frog, Emu and the Jabiru, etc. They encapsulate the place of animals in the environment, and as hunter gatherers attuned to where next years meal will come from, attention is paid to breeding and caring for the young so that there are full grown adults to breed again and to eat. Rightly or wrongly the stories are about the imagined feelings of animals, the things that make them happy and plentiful, the bad things that cause numbers to dwindle. Various people had various relationships with various animals, not as "pets" but as other beings in the world. For example: Ngarritj - the Yolngu speaking bird https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbSxc6Y1aVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbSxc6Y1aVA
  - peterashford 3y ago
    some != "all people across all cultures for all time"
- sensanaty 3y ago
  I mean even my own currently-alive ancestors (farmers, the majority of them) don't look at livestock as living, conscious beings. They obviously care for each animal and give them a swift and as-painless-as-possible butchering when the time comes, but they're not the bleeding hearts that many people these days are, they're mostly just vehicles for vital necessities. I don't find it difficult to imagine my great-great-great-great-(fill in the appropriate number of greats here to qualify for ancient ancestors) grandmother butchering a pig and not really giving it a second thought at all, having grown up on a farm myself. Hell, my current grandma is probably much gentler and gives the pork a much better time than my ancient ancestors did
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    I think it's a mistake to look at cultural trends across the last century and to extrapolate from there without any broader research.
FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
"A wise person does not kill any living being." - Mahavira, 6th century BC (Translated, of course.)
- pvaldes 3y ago
  We can easily conclude that Mahavira was either a dumb person, or an hypocritical one, 21th century AD.

LemmyInThePub 3y ago

> Our ancestors didn’t abuse animals on the scale we do now. It's sad this type of trolling is becoming tolerated on HN.

corinroyal 3y ago
How is this trolling? The development of factory farms where living creatures are so inhumanely mistreated at scale is a very recent development.
- j33zusjuice 3y ago
  They probably misunderstood scale to mean something like “in the ways,” not more literally “by the numbers.” I’ve seen people suggest that we’re more savage and brutal towards animals these days on other websites, and I think that’s an absurd conclusion to draw because I don’t think we have sufficient evidence for it. It seems unquestionable that we’re doing it to more animals, though. There are more people eating far more animals these days. I suppose some might argue they aren’t suffering or something? That’s crazy, to me.