4 ms·

So, here are the logical leaps I see here to make this "not unethical": * we must ignore the ethical implications of killing animals for food in general * we

by stolio 12y ago

So, here are the logical leaps I see here to make this "not unethical": * we must ignore the ethical implications of killing animals for food in general * we must ignore the ethical implications of keeping animals confined for their entire lives (clearly the ducks are being held against their will, otherwise the farm wouldn't need doors) * we must ignore the ethical question of whether a duck who has never swam in its life can be said to have lived a good life * we must ignore the ethical implications of force-feeding animals, whether it's painful for them or not * we must accept that electrocution is a painless experience for ducks * we must accept that being electrocuted prior to slaughter saves the duck from the experience of being killed * we must ignore the ethical differences between functional meat consumption and meat consumption for pleasure and social status In essence, as long as we sweep aside all of the difficult ethical questions there are no ethical problems here.

8_hours_ago 12y ago
I think that the question that this article is trying to answer is not whether it is ethical to produce foie gras, but whether it is less ethical than producing other farm animals. Only the 4th point you made is specific to the production of foie gras, and I believe that the article argued fairly well that force feeding is not painful for the ducks. Whether eating farm-raised meat is ethical or not is another topic all together, which this article doesn't touch on.
- stolio 12y ago
  I don't believe there's a comparison to be made between foie farms and traditional farms because they exist for different reasons, one for luxury and the other for utility. The reasons things are done matter: if you shoot somebody for pleasure the punishments are very different than if you shoot them out of some type of fear or necessity.
  - sukilot 12y ago
    90+% of industrialized-world animal-farming is for luxury consumption far in excess of biological need for a healthy life.
  - Ntrails 12y ago
    You simply cannot make such a distinction in any meaningful fashion. As a civilisation we've attempted to make food a pleasure at every opportunity, even when constrained by scarcity or ethics. Foie gras is inefficient on every possible food production for energy/resource metric. So is Beef. Foie Gras is seen as a luxury product. So is steak. Comparing them is completely logical imo.

by stolio 12y ago

8_hours_ago 12y ago

I think that the question that this article is trying to answer is not whether it is ethical to produce foie gras, but whether it is less ethical than producing other farm animals. Only the 4th point you made is specific to the production of foie gras, and I believe that the article argued fairly well that force feeding is not painful for the ducks. Whether eating farm-raised meat is ethical or not is another topic all together, which this article doesn't touch on.

stolio 12y ago
I don't believe there's a comparison to be made between foie farms and traditional farms because they exist for different reasons, one for luxury and the other for utility. The reasons things are done matter: if you shoot somebody for pleasure the punishments are very different than if you shoot them out of some type of fear or necessity.
- sukilot 12y ago
  90+% of industrialized-world animal-farming is for luxury consumption far in excess of biological need for a healthy life.
- Ntrails 12y ago
  You simply cannot make such a distinction in any meaningful fashion. As a civilisation we've attempted to make food a pleasure at every opportunity, even when constrained by scarcity or ethics. Foie gras is inefficient on every possible food production for energy/resource metric. So is Beef. Foie Gras is seen as a luxury product. So is steak. Comparing them is completely logical imo.