
"Consciousness requires a certain kind of informational organization that does not seem to be "hard-wired" in humans, but is instilled by human culture. Moreover, consciousness is not a black-or-white, all-or-nothing type of phenomenon, as is often assumed. The differences between humans and other species are so great that speculations about animal consciousness seem ungrounded. Many authors simply assume that an animal like a bat has a point of view, but there seems to be little interest in exploring the details involved."
This argument against animal consciousness seemed pathetic at best, and I only decided to post about it in spite of how old it is, because of the conversation is can spark. My problem with this is that this quote is supposed to justify animal exploitation and meat eating, however I really don't understand what he was trying to speculate on at the time. Is he saying that pain vary's by intellect? Is he saying that the desire to live exists because of societal conditioning? I'm sincerely confused at this statement, it seems to me, that by simply flicking a rat, and watching it run away in fear, there shouldn't be doubt that animals feel pain and wish to stay alive, anecdotal as that evidence may be, it is definitely reproducible, although please don't go flicking rats.

Am I misinterpreting or taking this quote out of context? I almost hope this is the case, although I guess you can't win them all.