• @ziltoid101@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    02 years ago

    Nobody is saying that fish are moral agents that can empathise with other beings. That doesn’t man that they’re not moral subjects; the ability to understand that one is causing harm is not a prerequisite for the ability to suffer oneself. I think everyone knows this intuitively, but it does feel good to have our less moral habits be justified by memes that we would otherwise find to be illogical.

    • @sorata@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      02 years ago

      You are right, but I believe putting a cease to life is not inherently bad. If we could kill animals without letting them feel anything, that wouldn’t really be bad.

      • TWeaK
        link
        fedilink
        02 years ago

        This is why we should be killing pigs with nitrogen, rather than CO2. CO2 is how a mammal determines it is suffocating, meanwhile the air is mostly made up of nitrogen so we ignore it. However, it’s precisely this which makes it dangerous to humans working nearby (also the fact that CO2 is heavier than air so you can have open pits), and it’s ruled too expensive to do it humanely.

        • McKee
          link
          fedilink
          02 years ago

          Or we could you know just not gas and kill pigs.

          • TWeaK
            link
            fedilink
            02 years ago

            I like bacon. Also there’s something to be said of the simple fact that almost all life eats other life. Why is plant life lesser than animal life to you?

            However, the day they start selling lab grown bacon I will gladly switch to that.

            • McKee
              link
              fedilink
              02 years ago

              Because life is not the most important factor to me. Sentience is.

              But let’s entertain the idea life was the most important factor. Raising animals to eat them kills way more plant life than just eating plants directly as you need to clear a ton of land and grow a ton of plant just to feed all these animals you’re raising. So even if that was the differentiating factor not exploiting other non human animals would be the way to go as you would preserve more life.

              Liking something to me is not a solid argument to exploit another sentient being. If I was saying that I liked kicking dogs it would not make it ok to do so for example.

              • TWeaK
                link
                fedilink
                0
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                I didn’t say preservation of all life was the most important factor. I said almost all life eats other life.

                There’s a big difference between kicking a dog and eating food.

                • McKee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  0
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  You’ve clearly asked me why I considered plant life less than animal life which I answered. I then went further and showed that this question was actually irrelevant to the point I was making because even if I were to consider it as equal or more important I should still plants instead of animal products.

                  There is no difference between the two when not in a survival situation. One is done for taste buds pleasure the other might be done because you enjoy kicking dogs.

                  Actually I would dare say that kicking a dog is better than killing and eating them.At least I know I’d prefer getting kicked rather than killed and eaten.

                  • TWeaK
                    link
                    fedilink
                    02 years ago

                    But what about a choice between being kicked and never being born? Most animals that are eaten are bred to be eaten. They would not exist if people weren’t going to eat them.