Why Do You Eat Animals?

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
Post Reply
User avatar
thebestofenergy
Master in Training
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 5:49 pm
Diet: Vegan
Location: Italy

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by thebestofenergy »

Dudugs wrote:You know it's quite unfortunate that some misundertandings led you to believe that I'm a wannabe psychopath. I could try to prove you that I'm not, but nothing will convince you, not even that childhood story when I made some bullies bully me instead of the mentally disabled kid. So instead, I chose to embrace my wannabe psycopath personality.

I already bought a ski mask and a knife. Here, look at one of my selfies:

I also have a list of victims:

1. brimstoneSalad (for showing me the wonderful world of being a psychopath
2. José Sócrates (god dammit, is it that hard not to bring a country into crisis?)
3. Ubisoft's CEO (ಠ_ಠ just wow, what an asshole)
4. That sniper that always manages to kill me in TF2
5. My mother who I do not love

Yes, I know this list is tiny, I mean, the Pope has bigger kill list than I do. But bear in mind that I am only a wannabe psychopath. Don't, I aspire to be a full-on psychopath, but it's a long road. Eventually I will kill everyone, all 7 billion people, except Gabe Newell, 'cause deep down he is the only thing I ever loved (if you don't count Mudkips, such cute fellows) and with him I will re-invent humanity as a much less lame species.

im cuming 4 u, brimstonesalad ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
-Dudugs
Good way to tell the world how much of a childish person you are.
You're being a hypocrite, and on top of that you're not even answering questions, you're just ignoring reality and avoiding to question your morality/beliefs, just because it makes you uncomfortable.
This is mostly a debating forum; a debate is interesting if both parties are willing to change their opinions, but you're not. Debating with you is pointless, a waste of time.
It's like debating with a religious foundamentalist that doesn't want to change his views: you throw sand at a wall.
And if you don't have anything left to say, what else if not going in 'troll mode'?
For evil to prevail, good people must stand aside and do nothing.
Dudugs
Newbie
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:31 pm

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by Dudugs »

And if you don't have anything left to say, what else if not going in 'troll mode'?
Troll mode? I am being 101% serious. And you're on the list now.
We gotta save the bees!
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10370
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

GPC100s wrote: Yes, that's why evidence for sentience is needed or else I must conclude there is no sentience...
Only if somebody tested for it, and couldn't find it- then we should conclude there's no sentience (until evidence to the contrary is presented).

If nobody has tested for it, then the default position should be based on what is more probable: which is determined scientifically by looking at what it's most closely related to, and other factors like that.

If it's most closely related to jellyfish, we'd lean towards no.
If it's most closely related to octopus, we'd lean very strongly towards yes.

Of course, in either case, a real test could change those initial assumptions. But it's reasonable to assume that until it's confirmed or denied by other evidence.

There's never absolutely no evidence, particularly in biology. There's always some reason to believe either for, or against.

Now, if we discovered ghosts/spirits were real or something, then we'd have nothing to base it off of (because we have no knowledge of ghosts/spirits- there's no evolutionary biology of them, no apparent relatives, we don't even know what they're made of, etc.).
Are they just some kind of stain on reality, no more sentient than the red-wine stain on a carpet, only interpreted by the human brain?
Or are they actual sentient beings?

Who knows. We'd need evidence in that case.

If we found ghosts were real, and had no evidence on what they were except they we made of something we didn't understand yet, I think we'd have to just admit we don't know if they're sentient or not.

Flip a coin?

I'd say:

If it's convenient to give them moral consideration, and it doesn't trouble us to do so, we should "just in case". But, we shouldn't go out of our way to do that, until there's some evidence (even a tiny shred of behavioral evidence).

GPC100s wrote: I mean species.
Species is a somewhat artificial distinction. See Ring Species: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species

It's all about % genetic relationship, and in many cases it's a gradual change from area to area.

And it's not even binary whether two animals can breed or not. As we become more distantly related, the probability of successful procreation drops- but there's no clear line at which it drops to zero.

It's still unknown whether humans and Chimpanzees can procreate together, for example.

GPC100s wrote:There is only evidence for the idea of myself coming from my parents, I am sentient, therefore it's only rational to say that sentience must come from them...
Some traits are recessive, and may exist in children, but neither of the parents. Some are mutations, and exist in one child but in no others.
GPC100s wrote:evolution changes things over time on the species level so not everything will become sentient. Also, sometimes abilities evolve independently but reach the same conclusion (co-evolution) so assumptions cannot be made.
Mutation, and genetics change things on the individual level. Traits spread to the species level if they are successful (although may not reach all members of a species).

I think the problem is you're looking at sentience like the product of a single precise gene, like eye color.

It's much more broad and primitive than that. Rudimentary sentience is almost on the order of the existence of eyes themselves- even the Family level is a stretch for variation in sentience (forget species and Genus).

It takes some very extreme conditions to make an animal lose its eyes (like living in a cave, where eyes are useless). Any animal that needs eyes, suffering from such a mutation, would surely die off.

Likewise, it takes extreme conditions for an animal to lose sentience (which basically means losing all of the brain except the equivalent of the brain stem) -- the best known example we have are probably oysters.

Here's an article about oysters and sentience: http://sentientist.org/2013/05/20/the-e ... d-mussels/
It's written by an ostrovegan. I don't eat oysters, but I can't judge those who do- it seems consistent.

The default scientific consensus on oysters (until we have contradicting evidence) seems to be that they are not sentient.

For all Vertebrates (subphylum Vertebrata) , however, the default position must be sentience unless there is substantial evidence to show otherwise, due to the overwhelming evidence that they're sentient.


To examine oysters a little more, take the Pacific Oyster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_oyster

Species: C. gigas (probably not sentient)
Genus: Crassostrea (probably not sentient)
Family: Ostreidae (probably not sentient)
Order: Ostreoida (grey area, maybe contains some barely sentient animals)
Class: Bivalvia (grey area, may contain some sentient animals)
Phylum: Mollusca (contains some confirmed sentient beings- e.g. Octopus, squid)
Kingdom: Animalia (contains some confirmed sentient beings- Octopus, squid, Vertebrates)


You have to go up three levels to get to "maybe".
Then finally, at the very broad Phylum level, we at last have confirmed examples of sentience.

Those are distant, distant relatives. Sentience is just not something that toggles on and off at the species level.

Take the common Octopus, as another example:

Species: O. vulgaris (sentient)
Genus: Octopus (sentient)
Family: Octopodidae (sentient)
Order: Octopoda (sentient)
Class: Cephalopoda (Maybe some are not sentient)
Phylum: Mollusca (some are not sentient)
Kingdom: Animalia (some are not sentient)

You have to go up four levels to get to "maybe not sentient"

All evidence we have, and all examples, point to it as a very broad quality. It doesn't vary by species. It's a question that comes down to Class and Phylum, and Order at the most.

If there are two animals in the same Class, and one of them is sentient, then you can bet on good odds that the other one is too. If they're in the same Family, then you can bet the farm.

If they're only in the same Phylum, then maybe or maybe not.
In most cases, sentience is a quality of subphylum or Class.
Dudugs
Newbie
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:31 pm

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by Dudugs »

t's still unknown whether humans and Chimpanzees can procreate together, for example.
Well, in all honesty some weirdo may have tried to do that, I'm curious now. What would a manpanzee look like?
We gotta save the bees!
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10370
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Dudugs wrote: im cuming 4 u, brimstonesalad ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
-Dudugs
:lol: OK, that's kind of funny.

But did you read my post? I asked a clear and serious question. If you believe in option #3, and you are a rational person, then you should have an answer. A. B. or C.?

Please go back and read my post, then answer.

Dudugs wrote: Well, in all honesty some weirdo may have tried to do that, I'm curious now. What would a manpanzee look like?
There are rumors of experiments, nothing very substantial though.
Dudugs
Newbie
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:31 pm

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by Dudugs »

But did you read my post? I asked a clear and serious question. If you believe in option #3, and you are a rational person, then you should have an answer. A. B. or C.?
D-Humans are in the same species.


There are rumors of experiments, nothing very substantial though.
.......ಠ_ಠ
We gotta save the bees!
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10370
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Dudugs wrote: D-Humans are in the same species.
So, if an alien species came to Earth, it would be completely moral for them to kill us and use us for food and making leather, because we're a different species from them?

Your only standard for morality: It's wrong to kill something for food or leather with close enough DNA that you could procreate with them.

Say nothing of our intelligence, or our ability to suffer... it's morally fine for Human beings to be kept in cages, bred, killed and eaten, as long as it's another species doing it.

This is what you believe, correct?
Dudugs
Newbie
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:31 pm

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by Dudugs »

This is what you believe, correct?
Actually no. A good night sleep led to what I actually believe.
I think it's bad. But I don't care much. I think it's a bad thing, but on my care-o-meter, animals are low. Which means that I might make small changes and will, but I don't care enough to make big changes. And before you jump at me saying "Ah, see, I WAS RIGHT!". It's just this one case. I'm not a heartless monster and most of all, I'm not a nihilanth. Have you look at one? Looks nothing like me.

Image

I mean, this is more like it, but still:

Image
We gotta save the bees!
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10370
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Do You Eat Animals?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Dudugs wrote: Actually no. A good night sleep led to what I actually believe.
I think it's bad. But I don't care much. I think it's a bad thing, but on my care-o-meter, animals are low.
Knowingly and habitually doing a bad thing and not trying to change kind of makes someone a bad person.
If you're trying to change, you may be a good person at heart, just struggling to live your morality- and in a sense, we all are.

We all have problems, what's important is that we work on them.
We all also struggle with apathy, and an important part of morality is learning to care more about others, even those who are out-of-sight.
Dudugs wrote: Which means that I might make small changes and will, but I don't care enough to make big changes.
Veganism isn't a really big change in habit- we eat like 80% of the same stuff. Vegetarianism is even less of a change- probably 90% of the same stuff.

Most of us didn't go vegan overnight. We changed slowly. We realized eating meat was wrong, and we worked at eating less of it. Some of us took a couple years.
Eventually, most of us went vegetarian, and then slowly stopped eating eggs and dairy.

Hardly anybody changes over night. The important thing is to make an effort, and improve a little bit every day, to become better people than we were yesterday.
many people who try to change their diets overnight tend not to be very successful, mostly because they don't know what to eat, and they end up eating the wrong things and making themselves unhealthy.

Dudugs wrote:And before you jump at me saying "Ah, see, I WAS RIGHT!". It's just this one case.
If you aspire to change, and some day become vegetarian (not saying overnight, most people don't do that), then I was wrong about you.

If you don't want to ever change, though, then I wasn't wrong.

The issue is whether or not you honestly try to be a good person, and honestly try to stop doing things you know are bad.
kian.zarrin
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:08 am
Diet: Vegan

earthlings

Post by kian.zarrin »

Hi,

Some people argue that earthlings show some rare and awful cases of animals treatment and then lie that it is common practice.

Unfortunately I found it impossible assess the validity of this claim without going to many different factory farms.

Can anyone help me with to find the answer?
Post Reply