We Are Supposed to Eat Animals !

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Any of you ever slaughter your own food?

Nope, I get upset just fishing and tended to annoy my parents when I was little insisting we release the fish that I'd catch because "he looked sad." Needless to say I was only taken fishing a handful of times ^^

It's humbling.

This is my point. Be thankful for the sacrifice^^

[Daywolf]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Daywolf]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[skarlorn]

this thread is like gospel to he who shant b namedeth

[AzzarTheGod]

may he never be named again *folds hands in prayer*

[Ahldagor]

The technology will get cheaper and then attempt to expand the market. Advertising the product effectively will take some investments.

[Trungep99]

I'm not a vegan or vegetarian but there are safe ways to raise children with such diets. There are entire Indian cultures that raise their neighborhoods being vegan

[R Flair]

Bet their men are 20% weaker than my mother.

[big_ole_jpn]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The injun thing is actually an interesting point, because whether they believed the rock was alive or not, they'd still do it. They would just be thankful for its sacrifice, just as they were for that of the prey they hunted, very similar to Japanese in that regard, but no surprise really given that Shintoism holds similar beliefs that God is everywhere in everything.

I am kind of surprised though that consensus (lack of opposition suggesting there is none, or everyone has tired of the conversation ^^) appears to be that it would be perfectly acceptable to eat animals (even alive) if they didn't experience pain. It follows the vegan argument, it just surprises me that people would think its ok. Seems arbitrary. Gonna have to think on this more.

is it really arbitrary to want to cause a minimum of suffering? being concerned with the subjective experience of other feeling beings seems like a prerequisite for seeking happiness as a human and not just living as a tortured sadist.

If an animal couldn't experience pain then causing it pain would not be an issue. It would be an "animal" in the sense that a bacterium is. It's not arbitrary at all. Would be like eating a plant (vegans are eating microscopic animalia as they do so, but bacteria can't experience reality subjectively so it doesn't matter).

I don't think you could guarantee an animal is not experiencing pain without shutting down its cognition completely though. GMO lobotomized animals may be a really fucking disgusting thought but it would never be more efficient to feed animals by IV than to just do what we're already doing until meat cultures. If we ever start breeding animals that are conscious and feed themselves but retarded such that they don't respond to pain stimulus as a "less-cruel" alternative I will immolate myself on the White House lawn in sheer horror (unless the entire nervous system is synthetic and built with just life support functions and programs for eating, but we will be beyond this petty argument when we can do that).

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by big_ole_jpn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

is it really arbitrary to want to cause a minimum of suffering? being concerned with the subjective experience of other feeling beings seems like a prerequisite for seeking happiness as a human and not just living as a tortured sadist.

If an animal couldn't experience pain then causing it pain would not be an issue. It would be an "animal" in the sense that a bacterium is. It's not arbitrary at all. Would be like eating a plant (vegans are eating microscopic animalia as they do so, but bacteria can't experience reality subjectively so it doesn't matter).

I don't think you could guarantee an animal is not experiencing pain without shutting down its cognition completely though. GMO lobotomized animals may be a really fucking disgusting thought but it would never be more efficient to feed animals by IV than to just do what we're already doing until meat cultures. If we ever start breeding animals that are conscious and feed themselves but retarded such that they don't respond to pain stimulus as a "less-cruel" alternative I will immolate myself on the White House lawn in sheer horror (unless the entire nervous system is synthetic and built with just life support functions and programs for eating, but we will be beyond this petty argument when we can do that).

No, not arbitrary at all to want to minimize suffering. I just meant it was an odd line to draw as you illustrated with your example of farming animals that function normally, but do not experience pain. Sure, they aren't suffering because they feel no more pain, but they are no less alive than a lettuce and still experience a subjective reality as you've pointed out.

Also, I acknowledge that doing away with farming would immediately yield an appreciable decrease in suffering following the final harvest/cull because at that point there would be fewer animals overall. But from there their population would be largely managed by natural predators such as wolves, cougars and disease. Only occasional intervention might be needed by man to prevent overcrowding and starvation. I question though whether death by wolf/cougar/disease/starvation would be preferable to a swift death by a normal man.

Honestly makes me wonder how many prey animals such as deer or rabbits die peacefully being taken swiftly by old age as they graze tranquilly in safe green pastures.