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

171–180 of 420 posts

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#171

Post by Tomis02 »

deutschewelle wrote: post #147
Tomis02 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 d…

> 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?

My enjoyment levels have nothing to do with the discussion. You're essentially using the same "we're superior to X" argument that has been regularly used for the entirety of human history to try justify what is morally unjustifiable.

> 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.

To me it seems you alternate between the "might is right" approach and "everything is the same, nothing matters" pseudo-nihilism. Funny you should talk about moral depth. I'm not trying to offend you but come on.

> I seriously somehow doubt that octopus is a hill that animal activists will die on seeing they failed to stop the whaling industry

Well, I'm sure in that particular instance there were also many people like you who at best mocked the entire effort and at worst did everything to oppose it for no good reason.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#173

Post by tengbretson »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #168
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…

We will look back with astonishment at the sheer madness of killing animals and eating them.

Doesn't it make you want to go back in time to the moment that humans invented the concept of eating animal flesh and putting a stop to it?

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#174

Post by pc86 »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #168
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…

We will look back with astonishment at the sheer madness of killing animals and eating them.

No, we definitely won't.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#175

Post by pc86 »

fouc wrote: post #158
pranith wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even cows are extremely intelligent and emotional animals. Did you stop eating them?

If you're a utilitarian part-vegetarian then you'd preferentially eat cow over smaller intelligent animals. If we assume small animals and large animals experience the same amount of sentient pain during the slaughter, we can minimize the amount of pain per pound of meat produced. This means that beef is likely the best choice of meat for consumption. Unless we somehow developed whale farms someday. https://www.smbc-…

I don't have the slightest bit of guilt eating meat products, including octopus, but it seems pretty self-evident that "pain per pound of meat" is a ridiculous standard. Pain doesn't exist in measurable units, the entire idea of trying to quantify it in relation to food production, much of which happens with little to no pain at all, seems pretty silly.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#176

Post by Azek »

numpad0 wrote: post #161
Azek wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think his claims is more like: a) eating animals is justified because we are omnivorous/carnivorous by nature, and, b) who fucking cares anyway. I don’t think it is “we don’t need ethics out there” as some might frame it. I’d say we all have this collective naive ethics that killing sentient animals leaves bad tastes in the mouth, and I’d love not having to feel or think about it, but that cannot immediately mean i…

So just because we're omnivorous and capable of eating animals, that justifies it?

Most humans are also fully capable and arguably evolved to do things like steal and murder each other, are those also justified simply because we're capable? And on the second point, the existence of OPs article and the comments around this one indicate that some people do care.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#177

Post by pc86 »

deutschewelle wrote: post #75
BoorishBears wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This person watched a documentary and come to a moral stance so you say "it's not achtually their belief". So any beliefs you pick up from your surroundings actually belong to the surroundings by your estimation. Strange way to announce you have no beliefs of your own, but assure you it doesn't apply to everyone.

The backhanded comment really wasn't necessary here. All I did was point out that a financial transaction needed to take place between an individual and a large corporation who push their own version of moral reality. To me that is THE experience of one's moral values shifting to match the narrative producer BY paying for it. Imagine if you needed to pay someone everytime you needed to FEEL informed rather than actua…

If you want to emphasize specific words, you can place asterisks around around them to italicize them.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#178

Post by hansvm »

pc86 wrote: post #175
fouc wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a utilitarian part-vegetarian then you'd preferentially eat cow over smaller intelligent animals. If we assume small animals and large animals experience the same amount of sentient pain during the slaughter, we can minimize the amount of pain per pound of meat produced. This means that beef is likely the best choice of meat for consumption. Unless we somehow developed whale farms someday. https://www.smbc-…

I don't have the slightest bit of guilt eating meat products, including octopus, but it seems pretty self-evident that "pain per pound of meat" is a ridiculous standard. Pain doesn't exist in measurable units, the entire idea of trying to quantify it in relation to food production, much of which happens with little to no pain at all, seems pretty silly.

If we draw on human comparisons, it's generally agreed that more deaths are worse than fewer, and I posit that the weight of a person doesn't factor into that calculus. If we assume that a given quantity of meat will be produced and that animal deaths are undesirable for analogous reasons to human deaths then it's perfectly natural to attempt to minimize deaths per pound.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#179

Post by pc86 »

bane wrote: post #144
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I've lived in the Midwest US for years and this doesn't track with anyone I've ever met.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#180

Post by kranner »

rtkaratekid wrote: post #146
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.

If it can be proved that it really would be just one bad day, e.g. if the animals don't figure out that their friends are disappearing one by one and the same is about to happen to them any day.

Clearly the burden of proof is not on the animals.

Post reply on HN