Earlier quoted context omitted.
But Minke whales are not close to extinction; isn't objecting to eating a Minke whale because blue whales are endangered something like objecting to eating chicken because passenger pigeons were overhunted?
I don't think your analogy holds. The big issue with granting commercial hunting rights is that you have hunters (and related industries) launching political attacks to expand them using the income and playing the victim when you take them away due to resulting stock decline. Once they are out of minke they will legally or illegally hunt something else. (Whether it is one or the other is just a matter of how much mon…
Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
121–130 of 140 posts
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#122Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
We (humans) have different relationships with different kinds of animals, just like other animals do. We have a symbiotic relationship with companion animals like dogs and cats, work animals like draft horses and service dogs, and farm animals like cows and chicken. These are all beautiful examples of humans and animals evolving together to provide for each other, leading to the reproductive success of both species.
" and farm animals like cows and chicken. " Population growth is not equivalent to symbiosis...
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not at all interested in eating a "burger" made using the same techniques as junk food. It's just trash made in a way to trick your brain into thinking it's getting real nutrition by faking textures and flavors a la Doritos and other processed foods. No thanks. edit: I'd prefer a response to downvotes. Companies like Kraft, Frito-Lay, and Post have had "food scientists" whose main job have been tricking people in…
Agreed. Junk food should be avoided and making people aware of this should be a priority, as the health costs are just too high. Junk food should have labels on them - just like cigarette packets have in Europe. But of course that's not going to happen. If the impossible burger and the likes is not for you, why not try other meat free recipes that are equally tasty, if it means not oppressing and inflicting pain and…
I don’t try to project human emotions on to animals; there is no way evidence animals have any objection to what you call “oppression” or that they object to what you call “pain and suffering.” Quite the opposite, I would say this is the evolutionary path they chose.
To your other point, the top 10 dishes I’ve ever had in my life were animals, and pan-frying a nice steak or pork loin along with eggs is a combination full of nutrition that I have never grown tired of.
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Junk food should be avoided and making people aware of this should be a priority, as the health costs are just too high. Junk food should have labels on them - just like cigarette packets have in Europe. But of course that's not going to happen. If the impossible burger and the likes is not for you, why not try other meat free recipes that are equally tasty, if it means not oppressing and inflicting pain and…
I don’t have any moral problem with the relationship humans have with farm animals. It’s a symbiotic relationship in which the animal gets shelter, regular food, and protection from predators as well as guaranteed reproductive success (at the species level, if not the individial) in exchange for its meat at the end of the process. Cows and chickens are the most successful mammals and birds on earth. I don’t try to pr…
However, I'm not sure you looked into how the majority of the meat we consume is being produced. If not, please review the videos below [0]. I'm curious to find out your thoughts on that - how that couldn't be described as oppressing and enslaving other species. Alex Hershaft - Holocaust survivor - certainly thinks so and draws comparisons to concentration camps and founded 'Farm' after escaped Nazi Germany.
> there is no way evidence animals have any objection to what you call “oppression” or that they object to what you call “pain and suffering.”
Do you have pets - a dog or a cat? If so, try to cut them with a knife and let me know what how they react. Anyway, no need to carry out this experiment - there is enough evidence that animals actively try to avoid pain. Why else are they screaming when they experience pain? Why else are animals being used in pain research? Maybe you think a pig can't be compared to a dog or cat. Pigs intelligence level has been compared to a young human child and piglets have passed the mirror test. Even fish feel pain [1]
>Quite the opposite, I would say this is the evolutionary path they chose.
How did they choose this path? We are breeding these animals into existence and there is no natural reproduction. Cows for example are forcibly impregnated on what is sometimes called rape racks - you can find these videos on youtube. There is nothing natural or evolutionary about this.
Anyway, let me know after reviewing all this information and after doing your own research - whether you still think it's OK for us humans to continue and support the large scale meat industry. Whether you think it's OK to inflict pain on sentient beings that can experience pain - just so we can derive pleasure from them by consuming their flesh.
[0] Reality of large scale meat production Meet your Meat https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RX88IGJ35g
Earthlings https://vimeo.com/209647801
[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/fish-feel-pain...
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t have any moral problem with the relationship humans have with farm animals. It’s a symbiotic relationship in which the animal gets shelter, regular food, and protection from predators as well as guaranteed reproductive success (at the species level, if not the individial) in exchange for its meat at the end of the process. Cows and chickens are the most successful mammals and birds on earth. I don’t try to pr…
Thanks for sharing your view. I'm interested in what led to this conclusion - maybe you grew up around farm animals that were able to have a happy existence most of their life and the farmers did everything to create this 'sheltered' environment for them and only at the end the animal had to suffer (killed). However, I'm not sure you looked into how the majority of the meat we consume is being produced. If not, pleas…
Your moral preference seems to be "avoid causing pain for sentient beings as much as possible." My preference is for the thriving of a wide variety of species with different evolutionary strategies.
You, presumably, also avoid pain as a rule, but there are cases where you would endure pain for a higher cause (ie: donating blood during a natural disaster).
Ideally, farm animals live a safe life without unnecessary pain, are given reproductive opportunity, and are slaughtered painlessly. The fact that current factory farms aren't ideal isn't a reason to give up on these animals completely.
> How did they choose this path? We are breeding these animals into existence and there is no natural reproduction. Cows for example are forcibly impregnated on what is sometimes called rape racks - you can find these videos on youtube. There is nothing natural or evolutionary about this.
The ancestors of current meat cows evolutionary chose, by being the easiest to capture and domesticate, the path of becoming dependent on humans for their species survival. It's natural because humans are part of nature, and it's evolutionary because the evolutionary strategy of submission was outstandingly successful.
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for sharing your view. I'm interested in what led to this conclusion - maybe you grew up around farm animals that were able to have a happy existence most of their life and the farmers did everything to create this 'sheltered' environment for them and only at the end the animal had to suffer (killed). However, I'm not sure you looked into how the majority of the meat we consume is being produced. If not, pleas…
Again you're using human values and trying to project them on animals. Are farm pigs less happy than wild boars? Are you against ant enslavement of aphids? Do humans oppress chicken more than cheetahs oppress antelope? Your moral preference seems to be "avoid causing pain for sentient beings as much as possible." My preference is for the thriving of a wide variety of species with different evolutionary strategies. Yo…
And to clarify all my arguments are against the large scale meat industry - where most of the meat comes from. I'm not talking about meat from animals you personally hunt or personally raised and killed - or meat coming from farms where the farmers truly try to give the animals a good life.
> Are farm pigs less happy than wild boars? Are you against ant enslavement of aphids? Do humans oppress chicken more than cheetahs oppress antelope?
Wild boars are in their natural state, i.e. free in the wild. Most enslaved pigs lead a miserable life and are confined to very small places, i.e. not free. Do we need aphids for our survival? If not, why enslave them? We can't compare ourselves to cheetahs, who need meat to survive. Humans don't.
> Again you're using human values and trying to project them on animals
That's not what I'm doing. I enjoyed meat dishes, but after doing extensive research of where the meat comes from that I buy in shops I stopped consuming meat. I'm not putting animals and humans on the same pedestal, if that is what you mean.
> [...] but there are cases where you would endure pain for a higher cause
What higher cause are animals 'donating' their flesh to? In our society we don't need meat to survive anymore - it's been proven that we can get all the nutrients we need from plants and other non-animal food sources.
So the only higher cause I can think of - why we continue to make these animals endure pain - is because we derive pleasure from it. So it becomes an ethical question - does our need for pleasure justify enslaving and oppressing these beings and creating destruction on so many other levels?
> The fact that current factory farms aren't ideal isn't a reason to give up on these animals completely.
Factory farms are the reality. Those happy ethical farms are rare in comparison and we can't feed the world with this - it's not scalable - especially since most people want and can only afford cheap meat. Interesting to hear how we can have large scale and pain free factory farms? But I think the question should be, is animal meat the best way to feed the world?
> The ancestors of current meat cows evolutionary chose, by being the easiest to capture and domesticate.
I don't understand how this works - do you have any links to some research that show that this is the case? It was easy for us to 'capture and domesticate' other humans - but we gave up on that practice, because we as a society agreed it was wrong.
Look - I get it. It's not easy to give up meat and we tell ourselves that animals don't feel pain, that we need it to survive, that it's natural etc.
We constantly evolve our moral framework - we gave up barbaric practices that once were the norm. In the future the way we produce our meat now will be seen as barbaric and immoral. Yes there will still be some people who eat meat - those that hunt and raise and kill it themselves and meat will be available to those that just want to continue to derive pleasure from it, but it will be very expensive.
Edit: typos
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do humans have the right not to be killed by humans? All humans, or just humans of the same nationality? If so, where do you draw the line between, say, killing humans and killing fish? I'm not trying to suggest that the two are equivalent, but constructing a logical argument for the line being somewhere rather than elsewhere is non trivial.
Can you or do you draw a line between fish and plants? How about plants and fungi? Fungi and bacteria? Btw, if you're upset at the reductio ad absurdum asking to extend rights we've decided humans have to fish also has a similar flavor to it. I for example have a logical argument that includes people but doesn't include fish: humans have consciousness, experience, and others (like children) have potential for such an…
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
We eat meat because it brings us pleasure. Nutrionally we can live without it [0]. So here are our options: 1) Eat real meat and derive pleasure from it, but at the cost of having to make animals suffer, having to kill them and getting food that's quite energy intensive and destructive to the environment and destructive to the people having to work in that industry (factory farming) 2) Hunt and kill animals yourself…
I find the end of (4) an argument from other leftists who are vegan really really suspect. It's blaming consumers for the conditions the system created rather than blaming producers who are actually in power. It has a similar flavor to preaching the 3R's and buying expensive hybrid cars when heavy industries and refineries contribute the most to climate change. We aren't going to fix climate change (or any systemic p…
In the end -- why not both? As an individual, over the course of your lifetime, if an American eats even 50% less meat than typical, they would produce a lot less pollution and a lot less suffering in the world. Meanwhile, they'd still be eating more meat than historically normal. Win-win-win?
Re: Japanese fleet catches 177 whales in latest hunt
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used the word as an adjective, so, relating to the general definition: a long-term mental disorder of a type involving a breakdown in the relation between thought, emotion, and behavior, leading to faulty perception, inappropriate actions and feelings, withdrawal from reality and personal relationships into fantasy and delusion, and a sense of mental fragmentation. Let's see: a breakdown between thought, emotion an…
If you think it's not a far scretch, my guess is you have not been close enough to and tried to help someone with actual schizophrenia. My guess can be wrong, of course. People are in contact with other people who both love and eat animals (though usually not the same animals). Further, where I live (though probably in a lot of places), vegetarians are a minority, so most people are in contact with meat-eating people…
In my regular in-person conversations I don't think I've ever used that word. I'll be more sensitive next time online too. Thank you.
As a substitute -- can you think of a word that would very swiftly capture the extreme cognitive dissonance people surely must have to engage in the behavior they currently do?