All Or Nothing Paradoxes.

[Koda]

Cockroaches can transmit diseases, butterfly really don't.

Butterflies lay eggs in crops that can devastate them.

The paradox continues.

 

[Indy62]

Addressing the moral/ethical dilemma I would say this:

It depends on whether, while killing that mammal, fish, reptile, insect, you enjoyed it. Did you like observing the life leave? Did you get off on it?

Or did you kill it because it was threatening your own life, or it came down to you starving, or it was a pest carrying infection etc.

It's a deep subject that I think many could benefit from thinking about.

 

[Koda]

Addressing the moral/ethical dilemma I would say this:

It depends on whether, while killing that mammal, fish, reptile, insect, you enjoyed it. Did you like observing the life leave? Did you get off on it?

Or did you kill it because it was threatening your own life, or it came down to you starving, or it was a pest carrying infection etc.

It's a deep subject that I think many could benefit from thinking about.

This is pretty much what the paradox of life in general comes down to.

 

[Indy62]

This is pretty much what the paradox of life in general comes down to.

It sure is

 

[lucusloc]

We haven't tested every animal to conclude any linear scale of measurable suffering, and it doesn't matter. A koala, a squirrel, a deer, a cow... doesn't matter, they express emotions wither we can see them or not. The level of emotion expressed or not doesn't matter. They all have the capability to suffer and experience it. Its why ungulates create herds for protection, its why the parents fight back against predators attacking their fawns, at risk to their own lives, otherwise why not just walk away, Ive watched deer refuse to leave their fallen friend slain by a hunter to the point they had to aggressively shoo them away... that doesn't happen in nature because animals are less capable of suffering, that happens because they are emotionally attached no different than humans.

A huge amount of that can be easily explained as a basic survival strategy. And how would you know if something is experiencing an emotion "whether we can see it or not"? I would argue that the presence of an emotion should probably be presumed to be absent unless it is demonstrated to be present. There are far more creatures that demonstrably do not have the capability to experience emotion (as a human would define it) than those that do.

Yes, higher level creatures probably do experience something approximating what a human is capable of experiences, both positive and negative. But that does not mean that they still hold to human values about the experience, or are deserving of human considerations for the same.

A thought experiment I like to propose to militant vegans with specific regards to cows is "how do you know that cows are not willing to sacrifice their individual well being for the security of their genetic legacy? Do you know for a fact that they collectively value their individuality as much as a human does? Have you asked them?" Maybe the vast majority of bovine are happy being one of the most successful large mammals (genetically speaking) due to their usefulness towards humans. When vegans are busy anthropomorphizing cows by asking if we think they enjoy being slaughtered I like to propose that maybe they do (as a collective whole, if not in the moment), because if they were not slaughtered by us in the millions they might actually be extinct. It is entirely possible that (as long as we are ascribing human levels of cognition to bovines) that our consumption of them is seen as merely a necessary part of their dues towards us in up-keeping their species, and that cowkind is terrified of the anti-meet movement as it threatens the continued existence of their genetic lineage (which, for all we know, is the absolute top priority of bovines everywhere. Seriously, they seem perfectly happy and eager to breed at every opportunity, and that despite their "continued suffering" at our hands right?).

Anthropomorphism is a tricky thing to get a grip on. For every "animals must feel this way about something" there are a dozen competing theories we could insert into the situation if we just slip our focus away from a human-centric viewpoint and consider other priorities living beings might have other than the militant individualism a huge chunk of us seem to espouse in one way or another. Hell, even our ancestors practiced various forms of voluntary human sacrifice at various stages of our development, for reasons even we have a hard tie coming to grips with, and that is without the barrier or cross-species understanding. Who is to say what is acceptable in some hypothetical hidden animal culture we cannot ken. There is certainly no reason it must parallel human sensibilities.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Addressing the moral/ethical dilemma I would say this:

It depends on whether, while killing that mammal, fish, reptile, insect, you enjoyed it. Did you like observing the life leave? Did you get off on it?

Or did you kill it because it was threatening your own life, or it came down to you starving, or it was a pest carrying infection etc.

It's a deep subject that I think many could benefit from thinking about.

"One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results."

Friedman

 

[Koda]

And how would you know if something is experiencing an emotion "whether we can see it or not"?

happiness.

View: https://youtu.be/RKdD-QOjpqE?si=ApQzafPn9zXmLmVA&t=9

 

[lucusloc]

Butterflies lay eggs in crops that can devastate them.

The paradox continues.

For the longest time this connection was not even a blip on the human consciousness. The lifecycle of most anthropoids is a modern discovery, only documented within the last few hundred years. Look at early writings on food spoilage, for example; maggots were considered to be a spontaneous product of rotting organic matter, not the offspring of flies. Butterflies and their immature forms were considered entirely different species, and this held true even in cultures that domesticated such animals, like the Chinese and their silkworms (who obviously had perfected the husbandry of all life stages of the creature). Meanwhile things like cockroaches will have been a blight on food storage and waste management for eons prior to these developments, so it is no wonder that the association is ingrained on our very instincts.

Paradox solved.

 

[lucusloc]

happiness.

View: https://youtu.be/RKdD-QOjpqE?si=ApQzafPn9zXmLmVA&t=9

Empathy and anthropomorphization. Who is more correct in their assessment? Why don't you ask the deer how it really feels. Get back to me when you crack that nut.

 

[Koda]

Empathy and anthropomorphization. Who is more correct in their assessment? Why don't you ask the deer how it really feels. Get back to me when you crack that nut.

There is no anthropomorphize in my happiness assessment of that elk calf.
If that one grows antlers I will put him on my dinner plate no questions asked. Im just well aware they have emotions, I dont need to be a scientist to see that in the video.

 

[lucusloc]

There is no anthropomorphize in my happiness assessment of that elk calf.
If that one grows antlers I will put him on my dinner plate no questions asked. Im just well aware they have emotions, I dont need to be a scientist to see that in the video.

And I am merely point out that humans have a documented propensity to ascribe greater human values onto situations where it is know that none exist. Again, I have little doubt that some species experience emotion somewhat akin to humans, I am just not willing to ascribe to it more than it is due based on empirical evidence.

That calf looks happy. It probably is happy to the extend it can be. I doubt very much it can be happy to the extent a human can be on simple account that it does not have the neurological structure necessary to support such levels of happiness. Indeed I can postulate that our own empathetic happiness at witnessing its happiness is quite probably greater than that which it actually experiences. And I can postulate that claim with a decent amount of certainty as it is entirely probable that we are devoting more neural activity to our own vicarious happiness than that calf is using in all its joyful bounding. But in our own human experience we judge that vicarious happiness is lesser than those actually experiencing it, so our anthropomorphization of the calf has ascribed to it more joy than it is capable of experiencing in its entirety. Human emotion superimposed over a lesser animal experience, yet we equate them as one and the same.

 

[lucusloc]

Somewhere in here I lost a request for more info on organic pesticides. Hopefully the inquirer sees this post. Here is a link documenting carious classes of these chemicals and their toxicity in mammals;

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6206511/

I would note that in commercial organic farming they tend dramatically towards the more toxic substances. Very few industrial organic farms are spraying cinnamon as their primary defense against bugs.

 

[Indy62]

One observation and one proposition.

First, I'm always surprised and amazed when my initial assessment of another's character is proven by that person themself..just give them enough time. Most are willing to tell you exactly what they are.

Second, I've spent hundreds..hundreds of hours learning, observing, researching Elephants. And I can honestly say, they are more human than we are.

 

[Koda]

It probably is happy to the extend it can be. I doubt very much it can be happy to the extent a human can be on simple account that it does not have the neurological structure necessary to support such levels of happiness. Indeed I can postulate that our own empathetic happiness at witnessing its happiness is quite probably greater than that which it actually experiences. And I can postulate that claim with a decent amount of certainty as it is entirely probable that we are devoting more neural activity to our own vicarious happiness than that calf is using in all its joyful bounding. But in our own human experience we judge that vicarious happiness is lesser than those actually experiencing it, so our anthropomorphization of the calf has ascribed to it more joy than it is capable of experiencing in its entirety. Human emotion superimposed over a lesser animal experience, yet we equate them as one and the same.

Disagree with all of that, I dont think understanding (and clearly seeing) animal emotions are real is anthromorphatizing them.

 

[lucusloc]

One observation and one proposition.

First, I'm always surprised and amazed when my initial assessment of another's character is proven by that person themself..just give them enough time. Most are willing to tell you exactly what they are.

Second, I've spent hundreds..hundreds of hours learning, observing, researching Elephants. And I can honestly say, they are more human than we are.

Elephants are one of the few animals that seem to have reached approximately human levels in some types of cognition. Deep emotional responses, basic morality, self awareness and even rudimentary communication skills. Them, the great apes, certain dolphin species and corvids all approach human levels of ability in various mental aspects. There may be a handful of others species that are currently being investigated. But we are barely onto two hands for the number that can relate to us on even the most basic levels, and none that approach our levels of sophistication.

 

[lucusloc]

Disagree with all of that, I dont think understanding (and clearly seeing) animal emotions are real is anthromorphatizing them.

Disagreement is fine. Proof is harder to come by. There is a whole hell of a lot more evidence for my take on the matter than for ascribing them human levels of emotional capability.

 

[Koda]

Disagreement is fine. Proof is harder to come by. There is a whole hell of a lot more evidence for my take on the matter than for ascribing them human levels of emotional capability.

Disagree with all that too. And to clarify, Im not ascribing them human levels of capability. That would probably be called anthropomorphism...

 

[Xaevian]

One observation and one proposition.

First, I'm always surprised and amazed when my initial assessment of another's character is proven by that person themself..just give them enough time. Most are willing to tell you exactly what they are.

Second, I've spent hundreds..hundreds of hours learning, observing, researching Elephants. And I can honestly say, they are more human than we are.

So you've seen them cry then. It's eerie.

 

[TTSX]

Someone has a mighty high horse they really don't wanna get off of...

 

[Xaevian]

Someone has a mighty high horse they really don't wanna get off of...

But is the horse in pain?