Animal/Plant Ethics

[Fluffy]

Although I am a vegetarian and hold a very strong view on the treatment of animals, I wish to take a step back and look at this issue from a more open minded position.

The general belief amongst humans is that it is justifiable to treat animals differently from humans. Therefore, I want to debate the following questions:
1) What is it about humans and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

2) How specifically should animals be treated? Is it morally permissible to do anything to them or are their circumstances in which it would be wrong to treat them in a certain way? Should some animals be treated better than others and what should afford them this privilege?

3) Could a human lack the same qualities that animals lack and other humans have which justifies this disparity of treatment? If so, should this human be treated as a human or as an animal?

There is another general belief amongst humans that it is justifiable to treat plants differently from animals and humans.
4) What is it about plants and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

5) If there is something about animals which affords them better treatment than plants then would it be more acceptable to perform certain acts against plants than it would be against animals even if we find those acts to be acceptable towards animals? For example, is it more acceptable to eat a plant than it is to eat an animal even though we do find eating animals acceptable or are these things equally acceptable?

 

[Magic Man]

It's all about identification. The more we identify with something, the more precious it is to us. We can identify more with dogs, cats, etc. than we can with worms and plants. It's also a matter of happiness. Some things scare us, so it's OK to kill those things, like insects and things. Other things bring us pleasure, so it's not OK to kill them. I don't want any harm to come to my wife because I identify strongly with her. I don't want harm to come to my friend's sister's friend, but it would affect me less because I identify less with her. The more you have in common with something or someone, the more you value it and become attached to it, and the less you want it to be harmed.

Basically, there's no real difference between cutting down a tree and killing a human. The only difference is in the value we assign each one. This is evidenced by the fact that some people hold animals' lives much less valuable than others. If my aunt accidentally runs over a squirrel one day, she doesn't even think twice about it. If I do the same thing, it haunts me for at least the rest of the day, if not longer.

I am an animal lover, but I eat meat. I categorize this the same way I do the fact that I comfort my wife, and do anything I can to help fer feel better when she doesn't feel good, and yet, there are millions of people in worse positions than her all the time that I don't help at all.

 

[snakeblood08]

1. I agree mostly with what mball1297 said. The more we encounter something on a habitual basis, the more attached we become to it. Human-human relationships are more valuable to us than human-plant relationships because they define our day to day social existence.

2. In my opinion, animals should not be treated cruelly and their environment should be protected. I'm not a vegetarian since the meat of animals is responsible for giving us the protein we need each day, but I think they should be slaughtered humanely; instead of torturing them because it makes the meat taste better... (what sadistic logic that is, huh?):sarcastic

3. Answered in #1.

4. I think the disparity of treatment between human-animal/plant relationships is the fact that we, as human beings, don't know how dependent we are on the Plant Kingdom as far as our Respiratory processes go. We share a symbiotic bond which is reponsible for both of our continued existences.

5. Going back to #1, it all has to do with how closely we associate plants and animals to ourselves. Animals share a lot more in common with us (observable commonalities that is) than do plants. We can domesticate animals, we can form relationships with them as pets. This gives us a closer bond than we could ever have with a plant.

 

[Mister Emu]

1) What is it about humans and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

Their humanity.

2) How specifically should animals be treated?

For animals raised for food, they should be treated with some care while alive, and slaughtered as painlessly as possible.

3) Could a human lack the same qualities that animals lack and other humans have which justifies this disparity of treatment?

No.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Basically, there's no real difference between cutting down a tree and killing a human.

... just wanted to capture this disgusting piece of pretense.

 

[cardero]

Originally Posted by mball1297
Basically, there's no real difference between cutting down a tree and killing a human.

... just wanted to capture this disgusting piece of pretense.

Did your human viewpoint want to elaborate on why you think it is a disgusting piece of pretense?

 

[cardero]

Although I am a vegetarian and hold a very strong view on the treatment of animals, I wish to take a step back and look at this issue from a more open minded position.

Fluffy, I would be interested in your position about animals that are used for commercial or medical experiments. Especially the ones that eventually benefit humankind.

 

[Scuba Pete]

1) What is it about humans and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

For the very same reasons they attack me: I am hungry or I want to defend myself. Once mosquitoes stop biting, coral stops stinging and sharks turn vegetarian, then I will consider a change.

2) How specifically should animals be treated?

With respect if you value your fingers and life.

Is it morally permissible to do anything to them or are their circumstances in which it would be wrong to treat them in a certain way?

It depends on your set of morals. I avoid malice when it comes to animals. However, my cat thinks that the brief cuddle I give her when I let her out is a complete violation of her little kitty rights. It is my understanding that the SPCA has quite a file on me including acts of malicious bathing, enabling the gross violation of her rights when it comes to inoculations via her butt as well as other sordid offenses. I can tell she has gotten to you already.

Should some animals be treated better than others and what should afford them this privilege?

Sure, for the same reason I treat my friends differently than my enemies. Am I shallow for that? Sure: sue me!

3) Could a human lack the same qualities that animals lack and other humans have which justifies this disparity of treatment? If so, should this human be treated as a human or as an animal?

Although I could never take a human life there are laws where this is acceptable, and they mostly have to do with defense.

4) What is it about plants and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

Plants don't complain as much when I kill them.

5) If there is something about animals which affords them better treatment than plants then would it be more acceptable to perform certain acts against plants than it would be against animals even if we find those acts to be acceptable towards animals? For example, is it more acceptable to eat a plant than it is to eat an animal even though we do find eating animals acceptable or are these things equally acceptable?

It is not acceptable to eat pine bark. It is acceptable to eat shrimp right off of the barbie! One tastes horrible and the other is oh so delectable. I almost always allow my taste buds to dictate what I will and will not eat. They've gotten me THIS far so I see no need to distrust them now.

I promise to never do to animals what animals won't do to me. I have suffered countless wounds from countless creatures, so I will treat them just as they have treated me: with ruthless abandon when I am hungry. Though they have attacked me far less, the same goes for plants. Fortunately, I seem to have some sort of truce with most of humanity. I will keep that truce as long as they do.

 

[Father Heathen]

1. Sentience.

2. Animals shouldn't be needlessly tortured or abused. Killing for food, in self defense or out of mercy should be done as quickly and painlessly as possible. And the difference between treatment of various animals should be based on their capacity for pain and emotion (such as a dog compared to a lobster, for example).

3. They should be treated with mercy.

4) Plants do not feel any pain or emotions.

5) what

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Basically, there's no real difference between cutting down a tree and killing a human.

... just wanted to capture this disgusting piece of pretense.

Did your human viewpoint want to elaborate on why you think it is a disgusting piece of pretense?

My "human viewpoint" finds it repugnant that you or anyone else would need elaboration on why equating a logger with a serial killer is sophomoric drivel.

 

[BucephalusBB]

My "human viewpoint" finds it repugnant that you or anyone else would need elaboration on why equating a logger with a serial killer is sophomoric drivel.

Amongst trees there goes the horrible story of the chainsaw. The first tree that will land on the beholder of the chainsaw will recieve a lightbonus from the other trees.

He was obviously saying that from human point of view, it's the humans that should lead the "best" life. There are no other creatures who would care if the tree dies or the human, besides the dog who spotted the tree as a perfect place to prepare for a new day of drinking..

 

[cardero]

My "human viewpoint" finds it repugnant that you or anyone else would need elaboration on why equating a logger with a serial killer is sophomoric drivel.

Then let us forget the cause of their death for the moment and approach it from your human understanding of how you would explain the importance of a human life/death as compared to a plant life/death.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Then let us forget the cause of their death for the moment and approach it from your human understanding of how you would explain the importance of a human life/death as compared to a plant life/death.

Explain to whom, you or the tree?

 

[Hema]

1) What is it about humans and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

In my religious beliefs, animals are also children of God because they are souls just like us. They deserve respect as well.

2) How specifically should animals be treated? Is it morally permissible to do anything to them or are their circumstances in which it would be wrong to treat them in a certain way? Should some animals be treated better than others and what should afford them this privilege?

With love and respect. Yes I think it is wrong to cause pain to animals because they have feelings just like us.

3) Could a human lack the same qualities that animals lack and other humans have which justifies this disparity of treatment? If so, should this human be treated as a human or as an animal?

The Hindu viewpoint - Humans are animals biologically speaking but from a spiritual standpoint we are able to perceive God, therefore attaining a human birth gives us a chance to attain enlightenment and break free from this Samsara or cycle of births and deaths and merge with God.

There is another general belief amongst humans that it is justifiable to treat plants differently from animals and humans.
4) What is it about plants and animals that justifies this disparity of treatment?

Hindus are supposed to cause as little pain as possible to other life forms. Since plants most likely do not feel pain, or if they do, it is not to the extent of other life forms, therefore it is acceptable to eat plant based food since the goal is to minimize pain as much as possible.

5) If there is something about animals which affords them better treatment than plants then would it be more acceptable to perform certain acts against plants than it would be against animals even if we find those acts to be acceptable towards animals? For example, is it more acceptable to eat a plant than it is to eat an animal even though we do find eating animals acceptable or are these things equally acceptable?

Answered in #4.

BTW, I'm vegetarian also.

 

[Magic Man]

My "human viewpoint" finds it repugnant that you or anyone else would need elaboration on why equating a logger with a serial killer is sophomoric drivel.

So, what is the difference between killing a person and cutting down a tree, in your eyes?

EDIT: And it would be quite a stretch to say that I equated a logger with a serial killer.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

EDIT: And it would be quite a stretch to say that I equated a logger with a serial killer.

Loggers cut down trees. Serial killers cut down people. Where is the difference?

 

[Magic Man]

Loggers cut down trees. Serial killers cut down people. Where is the difference?

The motive. Now, if you could anser my question, I'd be very appreciative.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The motive. Now, if you could answer my question, I'd be very appreciative.

Motive. Good answer. Thanks.

 

[Magic Man]

Motive. Good answer. Thanks.

So, you have no intention of conversation, huh? Kindly stop making remarks about me, unless you're willing to actually discuss them, then. Thanks.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Kindly stop making remarks about me, unless you're willing to actually discuss them, then.

Kindly stop making remarkably inane and repugnant statement.