Levels of suffering, vegan ethics - Page 2 - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 Old 04-19-2009, 11:29 PM
Arrrg! Me mateys.
 
Puppet Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,591
Domain -> Kingdom Animalia.

Animalia = Animals.

Veg*ns = Do not eat animals.



Doesn't matter about whether pain and suffering is there or not. Veg*ns don't eat animals.

korrakorrakorrakorrakorra
Puppet Master is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#32 Old 04-20-2009, 03:53 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by PneumaticJawz78 View Post

I'm hopping in late, but for the record, many vegetal organisms show apparent defenses/offenses. Onions, for a common example, make ones eyes sting upon wounding. Not to mention cacti, plants that sting, plants that poison...



Also, recent studies (no, I don't have a link on me) have discovered the plants send out a kind of 'radar' to other plants in the area when under stress- drought, toxins, etc.



But these are moot points, as scientists are releasing multiple studies as of late, letting us humans become very aware that yes, crustaceans and fish do feel pain. And plenty of it.



When a plant runs away from me I'll consider not eating it.
MrFalafel is offline  
#33 Old 04-20-2009, 07:40 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Andromache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 953
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFalafel View Post

You are basing a lot of this on scientific theories that are just that: theories. Have you taken into account the simple notion of 'what if those theories are wrong'?



Just a side note: a theory in common usage is not the same as a theory in a scientific context. A scientific theory is a model that provides an accurate, predictive description of the natural world, such as the Theory of Evolution, The Theory of General Relativity, Cell Theory, Atomic Theory...etc.
Andromache is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#34 Old 04-20-2009, 07:56 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andromache View Post

Just a side note: a theory in common usage is not the same as a theory in a scientific context. A scientific theory is a model that provides an accurate, predictive description of the natural world, such as the Theory of Evolution, The Theory of General Relativity, Cell Theory, Atomic Theory...etc.



All of that is just a form of mental masturbation. If you enjoy that kind of thing then thats just peachy but any application of common sense to thoughts around the differences between plants and animals will yield answers that are quite easy to understand.
MrFalafel is offline  
#35 Old 04-20-2009, 08:06 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puppet Master View Post

Domain -> Kingdom Animalia.

Animalia = Animals.

Veg*ns = Do not eat animals.



Doesn't matter about whether pain and suffering is there or not. Veg*ns don't eat animals.



Of course it matters. This kind of dogma worries me.
Move of Ten is offline  
#36 Old 04-20-2009, 08:12 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

Of course it matters. This kind of dogma worries me.



Wow I sure wish my life was simple enough for that kind of thing to bother me....
MrFalafel is offline  
#37 Old 04-20-2009, 08:24 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
My life is simple because it worries me when someone says pain and suffering don't matter?
Move of Ten is offline  
#38 Old 04-20-2009, 09:43 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Beancounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,339
All creatures have the right to exist and live their lives. Their ability (or lack of ability) to feel pain is not relevant.



I completely disagree with those that say that any creature with a pain avoidance response to stimuli is sentient.



Nonetheless, whether or not a creature recognizes its relection in a mirror is not a valid litmus test either.

Happiness is not the result of a mathematical equation comparing the good times and bad times someone has had. It is a state of mind.
-nomad888
Beancounter is offline  
#39 Old 04-20-2009, 01:45 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beancounter View Post

All creatures have the right to exist and live their lives. Their ability (or lack of ability) to feel pain is not relevant.



I've seen this baffling claim made several times, but my question remains unanswered:



what, if not pain, suffering or sentience differentiates exploiting animals from exploiting plants?
Move of Ten is offline  
#40 Old 04-20-2009, 01:55 PM
Veggie Regular
 
ajax13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

I've seen this baffling claim made several times, but my question remains unanswered:



what, if not pain, suffering or sentience differentiates exploiting animals from exploiting plants?

I'm also a bit confused when some VBers seem to gloss over this issue. I don't know if any species/member of the kingdom Animalia lacks sentience, but if it could somehow be proven that there was nothing it's subjectively like to be a certain animal, I fail to see how this doesn't have moral significance.



I must emphasize, though, that I think it would speak very badly of me or anyone else to take some position that we're entitled to disrespect any lifeform, sentient or not.
ajax13 is offline  
#41 Old 04-20-2009, 02:12 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Beancounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

I've seen this baffling claim made several times, but my question remains unanswered:



what, if not pain, suffering or sentience differentiates exploiting animals from exploiting plants?



Plants are different from animals...



They have no sensory nerve endings, they have no brain stem, they have no circulatory system, they "breath" carbon dioxid, for many plant species, unless you destoy the roots, the plant will grow back....

Happiness is not the result of a mathematical equation comparing the good times and bad times someone has had. It is a state of mind.
-nomad888
Beancounter is offline  
#42 Old 04-21-2009, 04:27 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

Most of us would agree that some immoral actions are worse than others.

Most of us would probably agree that killing a child is worse than killing an adult. And yet we talk about humans being equal.



I think that context-dependent comparisons between the immorality of acts (relating to two individuals) do not translate into a general hierarchy of moral value (between those two individuals).



Quote:
Yes, such hierarchies have a problematic aspect to them, but they are also inavoidable in my opinion. Sure we can avoid the terms "higher" and "lower" and instead phrase it more in terms of "amount of suffering caused".

What kind of day-to-day situations do we face where we have to compare the suffering of a fish and a primate, for example -- assuming an AR ethic?

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#43 Old 04-21-2009, 05:10 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenseas View Post

Most of us would probably agree that killing a child is worse than killing an adult. And yet we talk about humans being equal.



I think that context-dependent comparisons between the immorality of acts (relating to two individuals) do not translate into a general hierarchy of moral value (between those two individuals).



If I decide I'm either going to either stop kidnapping/abusing/killing children or adults, which is the better choice? My answer would be stop harming children. Obviously it's better to stop altogether, but when it comes to animal products few people are just going to immediately stop altogether. This doesn't mean children are "higher" than adults, just that I expect more suffering to result from that scenario than if it were adults.



Quote:
What kind of day-to-day situations do we face where we have to compare the suffering of a fish and a primate, for example -- assuming an AR ethic?



Since fish and primate is just "for example" see where I talked about people who want to give up some animal products but not all of them as an example that does face people sometimes.
Move of Ten is offline  
#44 Old 04-21-2009, 05:11 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beancounter View Post

Plants are different from animals...



They have no sensory nerve endings, they have no brain stem, they have no circulatory system, they "breath" carbon dioxid, for many plant species, unless you destoy the roots, the plant will grow back....



Which of these qualities gives animals the right to exist and why? Or I guess I should say which of these qualities/lack-of-qualities takes away plants' rights to existence?
Move of Ten is offline  
#45 Old 04-22-2009, 11:43 AM
Veggie Regular
 
SomebodyElse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In a California Ghost Town
Posts: 7,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

Most of us would agree that some immoral actions are worse than others.

No, not me. Wrong is wrong. There are no degrees of wrongness. There are, however, degrees of harmful consequence. Most people do tend to get these confused.

www.thesaucyvegan.com
SomebodyElse is offline  
#46 Old 04-22-2009, 12:10 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

If I decide I'm either going to either stop kidnapping/abusing/killing children or adults, which is the better choice?

If that is the kind of choice you are facing, chances are you won't make that choice based on any developed, considered ethical theory..



Quote:
Obviously it's better to stop altogether, but when it comes to animal products few people are just going to immediately stop altogether.

That's true but the requirement of an AR ethic is of course to do so. So where do these comparisons of evils fit in? I guess it's true that they are implied by "less harm is better than more harm" and defining harm based on cognitive abilities, but I think that's a rather marginal part of an AR ethic.



Quote:
This doesn't mean children are "higher" than adults

Indeed, and that was my main point.



Quote:
Since fish and primate is just "for example" see where I talked about people who want to give up some animal products but not all of them as an example that does face people sometimes.

Well some people will point out that exploiting fish for a certain amount of animal "protein" will cause more deaths than exploiting cows for the same amount, given that fish are smaller. Assuming that to be true, it will not be a simple comparison between assumed cognitive abilities.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#47 Old 04-22-2009, 12:56 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Beancounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post

Which of these qualities gives animals the right to exist and why? Or I guess I should say which of these qualities/lack-of-qualities takes away plants' rights to existence?



Well they have not evolved a way to proactively react when a threat is near.



I suppose at the most basic level if you consider plants to be alive in the same sense animals are, then you've got yourself a moral delema.



But I've heard that animals have a pretty difficult time digesting and absorbing nutrients from minerals....



So you have to make a choice...

Happiness is not the result of a mathematical equation comparing the good times and bad times someone has had. It is a state of mind.
-nomad888
Beancounter is offline  
#48 Old 04-23-2009, 04:14 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomebodyElse View Post

No, not me. Wrong is wrong. There are no degrees of wrongness. There are, however, degrees of harmful consequence. Most people do tend to get these confused.



What do you base the idea of "wrongness" on then?
Move of Ten is offline  
#49 Old 04-23-2009, 04:25 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Move of Ten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenseas View Post


That's true but the requirement of an AR ethic is of course to do so. So where do these comparisons of evils fit in? I guess it's true that they are implied by "less harm is better than more harm" and defining harm based on cognitive abilities, but I think that's a rather marginal part of an AR ethic.

I am not basing harm on cognitive abilities, I'm basing it on affective capabilities (i.e. the capacity to experience pain and suffering) as well as farming conditions.



Quote:

Well some people will point out that exploiting fish for a certain amount of animal "protein" will cause more deaths than exploiting cows for the same amount, given that fish are smaller. Assuming that to be true, it will not be a simple comparison between assumed cognitive abilities.

Yes that's true. It's complicated. Many vegs seem to think it's simple--you go vegetarian, then vegan. My main point is just that there should be more critical thinking.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Beancounter View Post

Well they have not evolved a way to proactively react when a threat is near.

Some have. There are plants that will release a gas when a catepillar is eating one of their leaves, whose smell attracts caterpillar-eats wasps.
Move of Ten is offline  
#50 Old 04-23-2009, 06:50 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Beancounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornsail View Post




Some have. There are plants that will release a gas when a catepillar is eating one of their leaves, whose smell attracts caterpillar-eats wasps.



But that's not proactive. The animal equivalent would be to squirt poison at a predator after it took a bite.

Happiness is not the result of a mathematical equation comparing the good times and bad times someone has had. It is a state of mind.
-nomad888
Beancounter is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off