Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rats free each other from cages (2011)

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 173 posts

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#101

Post by vasilipupkin »

justratsinacoat wrote: post #81

>Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different Most mammals react to painful stimuli (which we can provide a baseline for by testing it on other humans, whom you luckily consider to be reliable enough) with aversion and fear. We 'ask' this question of many animals quite frequently, and have throughout history. The answers are reliable and consistent. >If most people agree they do not want to pay ta…

Reacting to painful stimuli is not clearly the right yardstick. If I build a deep belief network which meows every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and wags a tail every time maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human ? I'd say no. Similarly, the fact that a cow reacts to pain stimuli doesn't automatically mean that I shouldnt eat that cow

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#102

Post by justratsinacoat »

Amezarak wrote: post #91
justratsinacoat wrote: post #81

>Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different Most mammals react to painful stimuli (which we can provide a baseline for by testing it on other humans, whom you luckily consider to be reliable enough) with aversion and fear. We 'ask' this question of many animals quite frequently, and have throughout history. The answers are reliable and consistent. >If most people agree they do not want to pay ta…

> Equivocating physical and emotional and social 'suffering'? Nope! I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly . > and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. I was describing how people in general work, not 'otheri…

>I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly

This behaviour you describe is usually mediated by some kind of non-biological impulse -- like the 'certain' 'knowledge' that the Hairy Thunderer/Cosmic Muffin will reward this suffering in some future-/afterlife. Those impulses are all related to the pointless social factors that you decry. These people suffering is still an evil, even if they ultimately inspire something that outweighs the evil of their suffering (religious revolution, buying time/forgiveness for their loved ones, etc). Plus, you're still splitting hairs because it's not like these individuals are feeling pleasure or not anticipating pain uncomfortably. Next up, BDSM!

>>>You're simply trying to exploit a "hack" in my social animal brain, which is that if you tell me that something is wrong, you are telling me that other members of the human herd will judge me unfavorably and perhaps ostracize me or otherwise punish me. Some people, but not very many, will be swayed by your attempted brain-exploit. But I, again, observe that my conscious feels guilt-free, which is a very strong sign that the people I am surrounded by do not, in fact, disapprove of my eating meat, and also that the vast majority of people I know actually eat meat. So somewhere in my hindbrain, I realize that you are (from my perspective) lying to me, and it will make me instinctively resentful of you, because you have marked yourself as a member of The Other

You typed this, right? Then you typed:

>> and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle.

>I was describing how people in general work, not 'othering members of my social circle.' People do not respond positively to being told something they do or like is evil. I don't think that is a controversial statement

Is this how 'people in general work', or is this you Othering someone? Did your interlocutor turn out to be utilizing the technique you perceived him to be?

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#103

Post by lttlrck »

d0100 wrote: post #38
grecy wrote: post #9

I feel certain that in the near future we will discover animals are a lot smarter and more emotionally developed than we currently realize, and future generations will look back on our treatment of them with disgust.

If an animal can't communicate complex thought, he is just an animal. No matter how "smart" or "emotionally developed" they appear. Until then it's just instinct. And if the day ever arrives, it can just be seen as an evolutionary step for the species, and not as proof that they where intelligent all along.

What if an animal can communicate a complex though to another animal? Like we do?

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#104

Post by adevine »

pipio21 wrote: post #19

My perception for watching the video is that the cage opener wants to mate with the rat inside once it is free. At least mount it. If there are from opposites sexes, there is certainly an egoistical reason for the rat to free the other. If they are not, rats are very sociable. They need close contact with other rats. It also looks like the opener rat is also very curious and wants to enter the cage too to know how it…

That was my perception as well: the rat immediately tried to mount the rat that had been trapped.

My issue is not with the results of the study, but with interpretation. I think it's possible to explain the desire to free the other rat purely in selfish terms without any nods to altruistic or empathic behavior.

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#105

Post by Dylan16807 »

tim333 wrote: post #97
ntumlin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an idiot; I know where meat comes from. I just don't care at all. You can have a holier than thou attitude about being a vegetarian than me all you want, but the reality is that I'm not a carnivore out of ignorance. I eat meat because I like it. A hundred thousand cows could die for a single hamburger and I'd still eat it. If you want me to not eat meat, give me something cheaper, tastier, and easier to prepa…

I know where meat comes from too and eat it but if I had to shoot a cow and cut it up to get beef I'd probably pass and have cheese fries instead. Too much hassle.

Slaughter is a hassle, but so is harvesting berries. And you get a lot of burgers from a single cow; you'd have to do it significantly less than once a year. I'm not sure if that's a very strong argument against a food.

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#107

Post by grecy »

d0100 wrote: post #38
grecy wrote: post #9

I feel certain that in the near future we will discover animals are a lot smarter and more emotionally developed than we currently realize, and future generations will look back on our treatment of them with disgust.

If an animal can't communicate complex thought, he is just an animal. No matter how "smart" or "emotionally developed" they appear. Until then it's just instinct. And if the day ever arrives, it can just be seen as an evolutionary step for the species, and not as proof that they where intelligent all along.

Hopefully when super-advanced telepathic aliens show up on Earth they don't think the same way about us because we can't communicate complex thought in the same way they can.

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#108

Post by justratsinacoat »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #101
justratsinacoat wrote: post #81

>Did we ask the animals too? Maybe the pig consensus is different Most mammals react to painful stimuli (which we can provide a baseline for by testing it on other humans, whom you luckily consider to be reliable enough) with aversion and fear. We 'ask' this question of many animals quite frequently, and have throughout history. The answers are reliable and consistent. >If most people agree they do not want to pay ta…

Reacting to painful stimuli is not clearly the right yardstick. If I build a deep belief network which meows every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and wags a tail every time maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human ? I'd say no. Similarly, the fact that a cow reacts to pain stimuli doesn't automatically mean that I shouldnt eat that cow

Nowhere did I claim that pigs ought to be treated as humans. For that matter, nowhere did I say you shouldn't eat that cow. Why are you trying to imply that I did?

Your thought experiment ignores a lot of established facts, like the neurological structural similarities between, say, pigs and humans. Both have amygdalae, both have periaqueductal grey, both have similar pain avoidance behaviours. Why not assume that pigs feel pain? If you're willing to ignore structural (same hardware) and behavioural (same software) similarities between pigs and humans, how can you tell that I feel pain? If my similarities to you in both physicality and reaction are not enough to convince you I feel pain, why are my words enough? And if they are, if I build a deep belief network which says "ouch, fuck" every time it encounters a penalty in its stimuli and says "awesome" every time it maximizes its reward function, does it follow that we now have to treat it as if it's human? I'd say no.

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#109

Post by mikestew »

tim333 wrote: post #97
ntumlin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an idiot; I know where meat comes from. I just don't care at all. You can have a holier than thou attitude about being a vegetarian than me all you want, but the reality is that I'm not a carnivore out of ignorance. I eat meat because I like it. A hundred thousand cows could die for a single hamburger and I'd still eat it. If you want me to not eat meat, give me something cheaper, tastier, and easier to prepa…

I know where meat comes from too and eat it but if I had to shoot a cow and cut it up to get beef I'd probably pass and have cheese fries instead. Too much hassle.

You spend a weekend butchering and you're set for the year, assuming a large enough freezer. No more trips to the store for meat, just walk to the freezer. The equipment to make the job tolerable is a large initial expense, but it'll probably last you the remainder of your life. In the end, the fries are probably more hassle because you're less likely to have a year's supply of cheese fry ingredients lying around. Source: I haven't always been a vegetarian.

Re: Rats free each other from cages (2011)

#110

Post by Dylan16807 »

justratsinacoat wrote: post #102
Amezarak wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Equivocating physical and emotional and social 'suffering'? Nope! I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly . > and your self-described thresholds for othering members of your social circle. I was describing how people in general work, not 'otheri…

>I was, but people also inflict physical suffering on themselves, from fasting to literal self-flagellation and mutilation. There have been people who offered themselves up for literal torture and sacrifice gladly This behaviour you describe is usually mediated by some kind of non-biological impulse -- like the 'certain' 'knowledge' that the Hairy Thunderer/Cosmic Muffin will reward this suffering in some future-/aft…

> Is this how 'people in general work'

Yes.

> or is this you Othering someone?

Who would be othered by that statement?

> Did your interlocutor turn out to be utilizing the technique you perceived him to be?

That statement is about a fact, not anyone else in the conversation, so it doesn't matter.

Post reply on HN