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

World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 420 posts

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#141

Post by Tomis02 »

rectang wrote: post #117
Tomis02 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This type of moral relativism is what leads to world wars, at which point people come back to their senses and proceed to behave, until the next generation comes along to repeat the same mistakes.

I hold the opposite perspective: world wars are brought about by those who are convinced that there is only one correct moral system — theirs — and who therefore have no compunction about inflicting it on others. The belief that the no moral system is objectively correct, and yet choices matter because they have tangible effects, inoculates against dehumanizing those who do not share your ethics.

Logical fallacies are why I dislike talking to people. The point of view you expressed is not opposite from mine, as you can have multiple moral systems that can live side by side without issues. My original idea is that some moral systems are bad (in regards to those "tangible effects" you mentioned), and your assertion induces the idea that all moral systems are more or less the same.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#142

Post by Azek »

vmception wrote: post #97
Azek wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My take is that they're related because a being's ability to experience sentience, and especially suffering are ethical grounds to not breed them and inflict unnecessary suffering through harsh captivity and slaughter.

So for you, is that something that extends to all farmed animals then? Its not possible for me to tell if thats been your stance on everything like farming chickens and salmon, or if you were one of the people that just found out Octopus' are smart and made a line there, or another group or individual with a unique opinion there are some observations and personal dietary choices I can be sympathetic towards, I just d…

If you're asking a personal question like I think you are: for me the courtesy of non-violence extends to all beings capable of suffering and with a preference to live. For a good read on the ethics of eating animals I'd recommend Peter Singer's 'Animal Liberation'

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#143

Post by Azek »

AngryData wrote: post #116

To me the most important questions are, does living a farm style life cause them undue distress and harm, and will they realize they are on a farm instead of just some weird octopus community. For example, the cows I own I can keep on my land and they are perfectly content to munch grass around the different pastures throughout the year as they are rotated, and have free clean shelter in the barn and free hay in the…

How long do your cows live before they are sent to slaughter?

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#144

Post by bane »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #123
bane wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Octopus is a pretty great cooked food, not as a sashimi. In Korean cuisine, at least, you find it stir fried, with noodles, in rice bowls, in soups...all sorts of things. There's several different kinds commonly eaten, from very small bite-sized to ones where a tentacle has to be cut into several bite sized pieces. It's often kept live until cooked, a practice that ensures both freshness and offended Western sensibil…

> But Americans are largely people who consider seafood to start and stop at canned tuna so... That isn’t very accurate. Coastal Americans have had plenty of seafood to choose from, consider when they would serve lobsters to prisoners. Alaska is full of seafood to the point that it is a staple (and considering many of the Inuit communities who have been on that diet for thousands of years). Just because the customs a…

Yeah, I'm being reductive. But my impression as an American is that you don't have to get very far from a coastal area for seafood to pretty quickly diminish on the plates of the average person...and there's a lot of the U.S. that is very far from any coastal area. In other words, it's not unusual at all to hear people say "I don't really like seafood" or will eat it very minimally like in fried fish sticks and tuna salad only.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#145

Post by jazzyjackson »

bmitc wrote: post #46
jazzyjackson wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do humans have a complete lack of an ability to say "stop, we're not going to do this anymore". Because not doing things leaves you with a distinct lack of capital. Not dragging on capitalism, just being descriptive: those who act collect the resources to act more

But what's the point? What's the actual need to continue to acquire more? Why can't we say enough is enough? You're just describing a mechanism. Oh, I know someone will respond with "who gets to decide what's enough?", but why is their answer to that, "well just let anybody do whatever they want"? The reason is the human condition for power and greed knows no bounds, and multi-millionaires and billionaires who like t…

I agree with you re: apes with electronics. I have a personal theory about human evolution I call "restless ape theory"

other apes might feed themselves, gain some territory, and call it a day, but not us. Some gene flipped a million years ago so that we will never be satisfied. Our ape ancestors hid from the weather and thought, this will not do.

I was not making a moral judgement about those who gain capital, just explaining why they're the ones that get to decide. It might not be the best way to make collective decisions, but on the whole its better than violence, which is the alternative for those who can offer no incentive to act one way or another. I guess religion works too, but the anti-capitalists seem to dislike that as well.

The point is, no one gets to tell anyone else what the point is. We are in competiton to persuade or have power over the unpersuadable.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#146

Post by rtkaratekid »

AngryData wrote: post #116

To me the most important questions are, does living a farm style life cause them undue distress and harm, and will they realize they are on a farm instead of just some weird octopus community. For example, the cows I own I can keep on my land and they are perfectly content to munch grass around the different pastures throughout the year as they are rotated, and have free clean shelter in the barn and free hay in the…

I’ve heard this called the “one bad day” approach. The animals have a good life with only one bad day. In my opinion it’s probably the most ethical way to keep animals if the intent is to slaughter them at some point.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#147

Post by deutschewelle »

Tomis02 wrote: post #131
deutschewelle wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In case it wasn't obvious the studies and this article is being written by people in the West who do not consume octopus. These articles almost always seem to derive to us-vs-them narrative, the idea that the West is somehow the forefront of moral novelty and the rest of the world is behind. When the irony is that the same random argument applied towards Octopus can be done on just about any sentient beings like cow…

As a European, I think you're wrong on several levels. > When the irony is that the same random argument applied towards Octopus can be done on just about any sentient beings like cow and pigs. Or like humans! It doesn't take a PhD to figure out that animals are biologically very similar to us and that they're likely sentient and intelligent. As far as I'm concerned, the burden of proof is on anyone claiming otherwis…

Do you actually believe that you would be able to enjoy the same level of human relationships with an octopus? How about a cow? Or a coackroach? You can attach romantic feelings towards anything since if you were so traumatized by having destroyed an sentient thing for your own benefit you would simply not allow yourself to exist.

I did not engage with your comment further since it signaled the same amount of moral depth like someone who will claim that homeless meth addicts are humans too and they will invite them to a warm dinner with your family.

I seriously somehow doubt that octopus is a hill that animal activists will die on seeing they failed to stop the whaling industry or a certain anti-oil virtue signaling girl with parents who work for the EGR industry who successfully convinced a bunch of people buy EVs.

I'm willing to bet that YC is probably going fund a company that will be able to produce imitations of Crustacean meat once the narrative Octopus Lives Matter have disseminated into coastal cities.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#148

Post by ajsnigrutin »

gfody wrote: post #128
AngryData wrote: post #116

To me the most important questions are, does living a farm style life cause them undue distress and harm, and will they realize they are on a farm instead of just some weird octopus community. For example, the cows I own I can keep on my land and they are perfectly content to munch grass around the different pastures throughout the year as they are rotated, and have free clean shelter in the barn and free hay in the…

can you really compare cows to octopuses? are there even wild cows?

there are wild goats, and the goats on a farm live pretty much the same life as cows do.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#149

Post by Azek »

crudolph wrote: post #129

Honestly we need to quit pretending that we, as humans, are something special as compared to other omnivorous or carnivorous mammals. OK we have more gray matter comparatively but really that means nothing. Some cultures eat octopus, some eat dogs, some eat cats, some eat cows, and of course some eat humans. And some eat vegetation. Do you honestly think those cultures sit back and question what they are doing and if…

Is your point that the majority of people don't consider their own actions as moral agents so we shouldn't either? If you're browsing this website from a phone or computer you are beyond the clamber of mere survival. You have time for ethical reflection.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#150

Post by [deleted] »

Tomis02 wrote: post #141
rectang wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hold the opposite perspective: world wars are brought about by those who are convinced that there is only one correct moral system — theirs — and who therefore have no compunction about inflicting it on others. The belief that the no moral system is objectively correct, and yet choices matter because they have tangible effects, inoculates against dehumanizing those who do not share your ethics.

Logical fallacies are why I dislike talking to people. The point of view you expressed is not opposite from mine, as you can have multiple moral systems that can live side by side without issues. My original idea is that some moral systems are bad (in regards to those "tangible effects" you mentioned), and your assertion induces the idea that all moral systems are more or less the same.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN