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

411–420 of 420 posts

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#411

Post by TaylorAlexander »

cheese_goddess wrote: post #408
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re right that the American diet has gone way too far to meat, and eating a more Mediterranean or South-East Asian diet would be a big health improvement. NutritionFacts.org is a non profit run by Dr. Michael Gregor, who runs a YouTube channel full of health advice. He looks at the latest scientific data and shares it on his channel. Based on his interpretation of the best available data a fully vegan diet seems t…

Thank you for pointing those out. I'll have a look when I can. I have to say, given that I grew up on a Mediterrannean diet and I still eat this way I don't have a strong motivation to cut down on the amount of animal products I consume. I think this may be a nuance that is ofetn lost in discussions about eating meat between people from different cultures.

> I think this may be a nuance that is often lost in discussions about eating meat between people from different cultures.

Definitely. USA meat culture is so gross I have rejected it all. And I really like the vegan diet! I really direct my criticism at my own country and culture, and generally don't have much to say about other cultures.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#412

Post by janto »

laumars wrote: post #402
janto wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If farming result in the existence of happy animals then the process definitely favors them. If it results in their unhappy existence then it does not favor them. The argument around doing them the favor of providing them existence relies on them having a nice life, until the day we eat them. It sounds like you are opposed to them coming into existence because it means they exist in existential agony. Also that physi…

> It sounds like you are opposed to them coming into existence because it means they exist in existential agony. No, I’m opposed to stupid arguments where you justify being a carnivore because you’re somehow doing these creatures a favour by farming them. You’re not. If you’re going to eat meat, and I have zero issues with being a carnivore, then you have to reconcile the fact that what you’re doing is immoral for th…

But as I pointed out, it's not a stupid argument if the animals are provided with a nice life until they serve their delicious end. It's a win-win if they are treated with care.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#413

Post by meerita »

kuhewa wrote: post #293
meerita wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying you're ok eating dumber animals and leave the intelligent ones alive. Interesting…

Yeah, I don't totally get equating greater intelligence with greater capacity to suffer.

How do you measure that? I mean, both intelligence, emotions, etc. I think your morals are so subjective that will not matter. You should eat animals based on more objective points, like nutritional factor, availability, rather than emotional arguments.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#414

Post by FiberBundle »

philipswood wrote: post #400
FiberBundle wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also entirely implausible, from an evolutionary perspective, that plants should have developed the capacity to feel pain on a scale similar to other organisms given that they haven't developed the ability to move away from situations that might cause them pain (pain being a proxy for survival risk).

Keep in mind that instead of fight or flight plants have a range of internal chemical responses available to minimise damage and that this does make pain plausible: Videos of plants calcium signalling response to damage: https://news.wisc.edu/blazes-of-light-reveal-how-plants-sign... Plants responding to sounds of herbivore (dare we say “predator”) insects: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00442-014-2995-6…

That's interesting, thanks for the links.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#415

Post by kuhewa »

meerita wrote: post #413
kuhewa wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't totally get equating greater intelligence with greater capacity to suffer.

How do you measure that? I mean, both intelligence, emotions, etc. I think your morals are so subjective that will not matter. You should eat animals based on more objective points, like nutritional factor, availability, rather than emotional arguments.

How to measure.. capacity to suffer or intelligence? Both are a active fields of research, the former in the neurobiology, animal welfare, ethology space.

I should add though, I think the science on the nature of sentience and suffering is not quite at a point to support some of the recent proclaimations made on the subject. There's enough there though that I reckon the precautionary principle is defensible though.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#416

Post by sweetheart »

cheese_goddess wrote: post #407
Azek wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is eating them 'necessary' if we can sustain ourselves without killing them?

I don't know. Is it necessary to shower if you can sustain yourself without it? I'm asking because your comment is about the meaning of the word "necessary" but the same meaning should apply to every other human activity, not just food. But the discussion about necessity crops up about food, in particular. Also, I understand that the comparison to showers might sound irrelevant to the discussion about the ethics of e…

When we say that it is unnecessary to eat animals, we mean it is unnecessary in order to survive and be healthy.

So then using that same metric to answer your question about showers, I think it’s fair to say that showers are absolutely not necessary. Nice, sure. Perhaps necessary according to social norms, probably. Required for a normal life span with average levels of health? Nah.

cheese_goddess, if I ever get you to see the validity of veganism, or at least cede a point, I’ll die a happy person. I don’t see that ever happening though. You are my HN veganism white whale.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#417

Post by unfocussed_mike »

quitit wrote: post #388
unfocussed_mike wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fabulous. It's clear from just watching video clips of them that it's not just about being able to squeeze through gaps. They evidently experience puzzles with an enthusiasm that is unusual even in puzzle-solving birds, can seemingly understand quite complex things like how to non-destructively unscrew bottle tops, and from what I can gather they are kind of obsessed with jars and containers? As an untrained…

>a way to "glance" with their touch senses at an object they hold and recall every detail of its shape later, a way to look at a semi-enclosed space and assess how their bodies will precisely fill it, to then look at an object and know what would feel like to cover it, etc. Watching an Octopus effortlessly change colour, size and texture to camouflage themselves might lend to this.

> Watching an Octopus effortlessly change colour, size and texture to camouflage themselves might lend to this.

Yes -- I was thinking about this bit myself.

I don't know whether it has been demonstrated that they have any kind of conscious control over this texture control, or whether it happens as a sort of evolved feedback loop, but I did wonder.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#418

Post by kuhewa »

meerita wrote: post #413
kuhewa wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't totally get equating greater intelligence with greater capacity to suffer.

How do you measure that? I mean, both intelligence, emotions, etc. I think your morals are so subjective that will not matter. You should eat animals based on more objective points, like nutritional factor, availability, rather than emotional arguments.

Also, to be fair to the people arguing for reducing suffering, doing so can be defended in a entirely rational ethical framework, it need not be an emotional argument. I'm just not sure within that framework how defensible it is to assume intelligence and potential capacity to suffer are correlated for many of the 'higher' animals we eat.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#419

Post by cheese_goddess »

sweetheart wrote: post #416
cheese_goddess wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. Is it necessary to shower if you can sustain yourself without it? I'm asking because your comment is about the meaning of the word "necessary" but the same meaning should apply to every other human activity, not just food. But the discussion about necessity crops up about food, in particular. Also, I understand that the comparison to showers might sound irrelevant to the discussion about the ethics of e…

When we say that it is unnecessary to eat animals, we mean it is unnecessary in order to survive and be healthy. So then using that same metric to answer your question about showers, I think it’s fair to say that showers are absolutely not necessary. Nice, sure. Perhaps necessary according to social norms, probably. Required for a normal life span with average levels of health? Nah. cheese_goddess, if I ever get you…

> cheese_goddess, if I ever get you to see the validity of veganism, or at least cede a point, I’ll die a happy person. I don’t see that ever happening though. You are my HN veganism white whale.

That's creepy stalker behavior - again.

Re: World’s first octopus farm stirs ethical debate

#420

Post by sweetheart »

cheese_goddess wrote: post #419
sweetheart wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we say that it is unnecessary to eat animals, we mean it is unnecessary in order to survive and be healthy. So then using that same metric to answer your question about showers, I think it’s fair to say that showers are absolutely not necessary. Nice, sure. Perhaps necessary according to social norms, probably. Required for a normal life span with average levels of health? Nah. cheese_goddess, if I ever get you…

> cheese_goddess, if I ever get you to see the validity of veganism, or at least cede a point, I’ll die a happy person. I don’t see that ever happening though. You are my HN veganism white whale. That's creepy stalker behavior - again .

lmao you truly are insane
Post reply on HN