Chicken (In)humanity [NSFW]

[Tegan]

Good to see we're getting this to a racial place.

*winds up the spring on Unanun's back and sends him off again*


Personally, I would eat black people if they were processed into a delicious kind of burger that was cheap and compatible with a number of burger toppings. Of course, I would have to be convinced that this was the natural order of things. But hey, that's never been too difficult, and Windsong is almost old enough to become an Advertising Executive. As for their supposed "suffering"... well.... I'm just one man. And that Soylent Black is fucking awesome.

Calm down everyone. That's sarcasm.

 

[unanun]

Empathy is an intellectual identification. The reason we don't think as highly of chickens as people is because of their level of conciousness.

Children and adults are capable of feeling empathy for inanimate objects. Americans would never eat dogs but Asians do. Where's the hard line? Just as much as some lack empathy for food animals, other people have it. Would you develop empathy, or engender apathy, if you worked in a slaughterhouse?

The ironic thing is that the higher an animal's level of conciousness becomes, the more likely it is to display cruel behaviours.

So we are in a unique position. We are introspective enough to say "it doesn't have to be like this."

So Jorick and Gold Marble lack empathy because they don't see things your way. Amazing.

Isn't this a slippery slope argument? And it's not that they don't see things 'my' way. Talking about things dying for your own life is an uncomfortable subject, because presumably we want to avoid death and would not wish it upon other creatures we are emotionally close to, like pets, friends, and family. Some of us choose to resolve this paradox by accepting the death of, and not empathizing, with food: Jorrick explicitly said that is what he does. Some of us make a choice to limit our palate, i.e. vegetarians. And some of us, like me, live with the uncomfortable paradox that eating meat means something died and most likely suffered, but we like the meat ...

Getting back to our discussion on plants: what do you think of plants that live in fire ecology? Does a tree scream in pain when it is being burnt? But fire is a natural part of the system and it is essential for the ecology. What about plants that live in tundra? They constantly live in temperatures we would die in. Are they shivering?

If that's your opinion of me? Cool. Have fun with it.

Is that not what you just said? You enjoy the taste of the animal, and there is some economic threshold where you will purchase megafarm chicken over what is the 'morally correct' choice. You have put a price on suffering. I do it too and I am aware of it.

You commented on the fact that you tore open a crab or whatever, and called that barbaric when compared to a human. Toellner then pointed out that if he was dead, he wouldn't mind if his body was torn open in that way.

You, and him, are correct. Eating meat off the dead animal was my realization that consuming meat is an uncomfortable paradox for me. That was part of my contributed anecdote: but that is separate from my post where I condemned Jorrick, and others who agree with him, for accepting and being indifferent to the suffering of animals before they turn into meat.

 

[Diana]

JUST A REMINDER: THIS ISN'T A DEBATE THREAD

Just a discussion for people to state their feelings on the subject. :D

 

[Brovo]

Isn't this a slippery slope argument?

But your value system is different - you simply enjoy the taste of meat and the economic pricing to not care if an animal suffered or not. I claim you lack empathy.

Here, these should help you. Also understand what a Tu Quoque is.

 

[Kestrel]

Children and adults are capable of feeling empathy for inanimate objects.

Then why don't you feel bad for plants? Why don't you feel bad for soylent? I mean we're capable of feeling empathy for them. No seriously. I don't understand where you're trying to go with this.

Americans would never eat dogs but Asians do. Where's the hard line? Just as much as some lack empathy for food animals, other people have it.

The reason dog became a food in certain regions of China was famine. The hard line apparently was survival. Though that begs the question; does an action you'd condemn so become okay in times of need? After all, while not the most common dish it's a normalised concept. So you tell me.

Would you develop empathy, or engender apathy, if you worked in a slaughterhouse?

Apathy. Because most people who kill people have issues and the last time I checked, butchers and farmers don't have a significantly higher chance of contracting depression.

 

[unanun]

Then why don't you feel bad for plants?

Because plants don't feel pain. If I popped open a tube of toothpaste the toothpaste would ooze out. That is exactly what plants are doing. Saying the toothpaste is suffering is an intellectual stretch. Perhaps you will say "but unanun, didn't you just say we can empathize with inanimate objects?" yes - when we ascribe human like characteristics to it. There is a (unclear) line at which a CNS becomes complex enough to exhibit attributes we empathize with. Most animals cross that threshold - I am questioning why should we not care about their suffering if they have been set aside for meat.

Why don't you feel bad for soylent?

A lot of soylent comes from cells. It is hard to argue that a cell suffers when it is lysed for its nutrients.

If you pushed me further, I would say yes in fact I even do feel bad that something has to die for my sake. But at least with plants they are not suffering from a bad feeling that is born from having a complex enough CNS - they are not suffering from the same kind of feeling that animals do.

 

[Darog]

Relevant.

 

[Kestrel]

Because plants don't feel pain.

Except this is false.

If I popped open a tube of toothpaste the toothpaste would ooze out. That is exactly what plants are doing. Saying the toothpaste is suffering is an intellectual stretch. Perhaps you will say "but unanun, didn't you just say we can empathize with inanimate objects?" yes - when we ascribe human like characteristics to it. There is a (unclear) line at which a CNS becomes complex enough to exhibit attributes we empathize with. Most animals cross that threshold - I am questioning why should we not care about their suffering if they have been set aside for meat.

You mention how we ascribe characteristics to an animal or object, but that's a personal experience. And so, it no longer is a question of 'can X feel Y' but what you emphatise with on what level...

Which I guess means just answered your own question.

 

[unanun]

Except this is false.

Because ....? I've spent the last few pages trying to show you that plants don't feel pain.

You mention how we ascribe characteristics to an animal or object, but that's a personal experience. And so, it no longer is a question of 'can X feel Y' but what you emphatise with on what level...

No, that's psychologically proven. You can do a quick google search to prove that to yourself.

 

[Kestrel]

Because ....? I've spent the last few pages trying to show you that plants don't feel pain.

No, that's psychologically proven. You can do a quick google search to prove that to yourself.

This came up. I don't see how you've disproved anything.

If we're talking about empathy, I'm not denying the ability to empathise but rather arguing what we empathise with and to what degree are a personal experiences.

 

[Tegan]

JUST A REMINDER: THIS ISN'T A DEBATE THREAD

Just a discussion for people to state their feelings on the subject. :D

Pro-Tip, when Boss Lady says something like this, even when it SEEMS like a polite reminder, it really means 'stop behaving like uppity douche bags or I'm locking the thread.'


It's easy to get riled up at those who seem to have no regard for any life but their own. And it's easy to get upset when those Science-Minded so and so's keep asking you to show your math.

But Boss Lady has spoken.

She's nice, but she doesn't like to be ignored.


You'll find a Chill Pill implanted in your back right molars, I suggest you crack it open.

 

[Hecatoncheires]

*Lurks in the background with his finger on the 'Lock Thread' button*

I'm like your very own intellectual Doom of Damocles, or something.

 

[unanun]

I'll go to PMs o_o

 

[Holmishire]

JUST A REMINDER: THIS ISN'T A DEBATE THREAD

Just a discussion for people to state their feelings on the subject. :D

oops

Toellner

Also, I meant Goldmarble, not Toellner. I was chatting with him elsewhere at the time, so my mind got mixed up. Sorry. ;]

 

[Alphakoka]

*Lurks in the background with his finger on the 'Lock Thread' button*

I'm like your very own intellectual Doom of Damocles, or something.

Yeah, you're the Morgan to our Harry Dresden.
You can end things given the reason to pull the trigger, we still will be a pain in the ass to you while trying to make sure you don't pull that trigger.
:p

 

[Jorick]

Oh, well then, I suppose I'll take my responses to stuff from the previous page to a PM.

*Lurks in the background with his finger on the 'Lock Thread' button*

I'm like your very own intellectual Doom of Damocles, or something.

Ohhey, I've been reading The Dresden Files the past couple weeks, just about done with the most recent one. Good shit.

 

[Asmodeus]

This stuff is awful and shit.

 

[Diana]

*Smiles sweetly.* :D Good minions!

 

[Asmodeus]

Man, I wanna eat that owl.

 

[The Nexerus]

Trigger Warning: Chicken is delicious.

Apparently one of the better meats in regards to the feed consumed versus meat produced ratio, too.