this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
258 points (100.0% liked)

196

16582 readers
2888 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Found in the comments of a youtube vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwI6py78gsI (I didn't watch because I never watch youtube videos, only reading the comments.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If the giant that never harmed me for my entire life, and always provided me with the sustenance and shelter I need to live one day killed me before I knew what was happening, I would have a pain-free death, yes.

You're right that they suffer. All complex beings suffer in all environments. The amount they suffer is acceptable, and their lives are short but lavish compared to what they would live in the wild, or compared to never existing at all.

Living things are just that, things. Biochemical machines that exist to transform available resources into more copies of their genome. If they show no indication of sentience, then their lives are not worth anything in their own right. You don't need to pretend I'm sanitizing anything.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

compared to never existing at all.

You may want to look into the repugnant conclusion. That path of reasoning is very flawed.

Do you mean to say you don't think chickens have signs of sentience? I'm not following that last thing. You would be completely happy to torture them if that was so, or rather it would be impossible to torture them in the same way it is impossible to torture a rock.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

No. Torture deliberately inflicts pain without providing any benefit. It is only suitable for use against sentient creatures who understand that compliance message the torture will stop. To do that to something that just thinks you're killing it and can't understand why is basically the definition of animal abuse. Non-sentience doesn't make animal abuse okay, it only makes swift and painless killings of those animals okay.

But I'm just rehashing what I've already said. You're trying to put words in my mouth. Like it or not, existing as livestock is not torture, and consuming the products of those livestock is not unethical. You just want to have someone to think less of and you choose to pretend that meat eaters are just as bad as murderers so you can place yourself as morally and ethically superior to them. Because at the end of the day, you care more about your ego than whether your campaigns actually reduce suffering of real animals that are actually being tortured in factory farms.