5 ms·
What's more moral, experimenting on one pig or letting thousands of people die who could be helped by your research?
by chpatrick 3y ago
What's more moral, experimenting on one pig or letting thousands of people die who could be helped by your research?
- throwaway373737 3y ago[flagged]
- krisoft 3y agoOr as an alternative question: is it less moral to do this experiment than eating the pig? Because society seems to be by far and large be okay with eating pigs.
- amelius 3y agoI think the relevant question is: if you were the pig, would you choose the experiment over being treated as in the food industry?
- rl3 3y ago>I think the relevant question is: if you were the pig, would you choose the experiment over being treated as in the food industry? Any day. The pigs were anesthetized. A slaughter house is a positively horrific experience by contrast.
- i8comments 3y agoEating is a basic necessity for life, scientific experiments are not; you can eat plants instead, too.
- chpatrick 3y agoScientific experiments are necessary for life if you're dying of a fatal illness.
- Teever 3y agoWhat does this have to do with my comment?
- chpatrick 3y agoI understand what you're saying but it's pretty much impossible to be scientific in biology or medicine without animal testing.
- i8comments 3y agoI say it is more moral to stop animal testing; our moral systems are different.
- chpatrick 3y agoFair enough, but then it would be hypocritical to take advantage of pretty much any modern medicine. All drugs and procedures were tested on animals, as well as biological research.