BenthamsBulldog

4 ms·

1.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
I'm using the standard definition of consciousness--having subjective experience. Not sure what "BS math" I used. I agree that lots of people in the real world need help. Helping them is good. But so is averting enormous a
2.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
I also think that people shouldn't eat them, but donating is much more effective. In total, fewer shrimp die painfully, which is good (it a second doctor provides an anesthetic for a patient before death, that wouldn't be bad by
3.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
What about the brain? https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00441-017-2607-y#...
4.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
Seems silly that one post from one person would cause you to rethink a movement.
5.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
But thinking that extreme suffering is bad doesn't require thinking that wireheading for tons of pleasure is good.
6.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
Sure but if we're not sure then the possible infliction of huge amounts of horrendous suffering on trillions of them is quite serious. If there's even a 5% chance that shrimp feel pain as intensely as humans, the SWP is an excel
7.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
Right but Norcross gives an argument against that. You either have to think that slightly reducing pain and making it 1000 times as prevalent doesn't always make a worse state of affairs or deny that worse than is transitive.
8.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
But if neuron counts, as they show, have no reliable correlation (and in some cases an inverse correlation) with valenced experience, why would we use them to rule out intense experiences?
9.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
No, it's not about lifespan. They have a very complicated report that tries to quantify intensity of suffering relying on a variety of proxies
10.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
This is to model uncertainty not difference across species. The 50th percentile guess is that shrimp feel pain 3.1% as intensely as humans while the mean is 19%
11.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
But the numbers didn't come from me but from the RP report.
12.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
I'm also against exploiting them.
13.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
Thanks for the kind words! I agree lots of people would value a human more than any number of shrimp. Now, in the article, I'm talking about which is worse--extreme suffering for one human or extreme suffering for millions of shrimp.
14.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
No, that isn't true. We can consider some metric like being at some temperature for an hour. Start with some truly torturous pain like being at 500 degrees for an hour (you'd die quickly, ofc). One person being at 500 degrees i
15.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
It's not a waste as another commenter noted, just probably not the best use of money. I agree this is unintuitive, but I submit that's because of speceisism. What about shrimp makes it so that tens of millions of them painfully d
16.
by BenthamsBulldog 2y ago
Seems possible in principle. Experiences can cause one to feel more or less pain--what's wrong with quantifying it? Sure it will be a bit handwavy and vague, but the alternative of doing no comparisons and just going based on vibes i
17.
by BenthamsBulldog 4y ago
Here I describe the insanity of the debate community.
18.
by BenthamsBulldog 4y ago
Here is the article! It argues that it's wrong to eat meat.