Speciesm

[anarchyisbliss]

this is what a famous Animal Equalist said about Speciesm. His name is Dr. Singer. Respond to his ideas and commments.

Singer maintains that if pain matters morally then it matters wherever it occurs. Therefore any sentient creature who has an interest in avoiding such pain should have its interest taken into account. He then discounts such properties as intelligence, moral capacity, race, gender etc as being relevant and he maintains that sentience is the only defensible boundary for having ones interests taken into account.

Sentient beings of differing degrees of intelligence should thus have their equal interests considered equally.
Sentient beings of differing races should thus have their equal interests considered equally.
Likewise, he considers that sentient beings regardless of species should have their equal interests considered equally

To discriminate on the basis of intelligence, race, etc is wrong because these differences are irrelevant to whether something has interests or not.
To discriminate on the basis of species is wrong because this difference is irrelevant to whether something has interests. To disregard the interests of animals simply because they are of a different species is morally unjustifiable (speciest). It is comparable to racism, sexism, etc.

He considers that speciesism may be the last form of discrimination that we routinely practice without being aware of it.

To change our lifestyles so that we do not condone the exploitation of animals is hard. But we should consider how hard it would have been for slave owners to change their lifestyles so as not to condone the exploitation of people.

[Samhains]

Anytime we add an IST or ISUM at the end of something it confuses things that much more.

We are aragent to think we can save any species.
We can not even get along with our selves, we can not save the world, we can not save individual species.

One thousand years with out man on this planet would be a god sent, Things would return to their natural balance. The way they where, the way they should be.

25 species of animals disapear each day, ones we have never seen or will see, new ones are created, old ones die off. Its been happening for millions of years.

The only really species that is in trouble on this world is US, there will be all kinds of plants and animals still here after we are gone.

What people have forgot is how the earth really works. Remember we where born out of it? Remember that every living thing from Tree to Plant, to Bird to Elephant was born out of this soil? This Earth.
The Planet is a self correcting system, and a SELF PEOPLING WORLD.
The planet peoples, like an apple tree apples, it just does because that is it's design. The design of the earth is to creates beings , and it does. You, me, the birds and the bees, all created by the earth; It will do it again, and again, and again, no matter what humans think.

[Abiathar]

(It would appear my compatriot Samhains watches a bit much George Carlin )

However, in this sense, speciesm is simply a fact of nature, unless one deems Cows and Chickens intelligent, and as such why are we eating them? If we were, by some inherent factor of creation, supposed to respect all of the animal kingdom, why do we eat most of it and kill the other half? A lion is better than an antelope, and if this is not believed then ask an antelope directly after a lion attack, if its still capable of mental process at all, and ask if it thinks that it and said Lion were equal.

Predator/Prey relationships rely upon the fact that one set of animals is, in some way, vastly superior to the other. Generally this superiority is in terms of speed, claws, and teeth. Consider vehicles our speed, and guns/bows as our claws and teeth. Predator/Prey.

On the topic of sentient beings, if you can find me a cow who, upon entering the knockerman's shed, panics and tries to run, then I will accept that Cows may be sentient. Unfortunately, the case is often that the cow meanders happily into the knockerman's shed, though all other cows come out the other side dead or as various choice select cuts. Animals, by simple observation, and scientific testing, tend to lack in what one would consider an Imagination, Logical processing ability, or any real sense of self. On the contrary, as is the case with wolves, the pack tends to almost think as a hive. Most herd animals do this, and most animals are herd animals. It is a rare and seldom creature whom travels alone, such as a polar bear, but even this creature shows no function beyond eating and reproducing.

The only two animals I would accept being sentient (without a goodly amount of evidence to the contrary) are Dolphins and Elephants, and possibly most apes if it comes to it. Coincidently, all three of these are either protected, or holy, in the countries they reside. In addition, it is rather rare that a human needs to kill any of these three animals.

Speciesm is simply a mechanical aspect of life, if one species were not lesser than the other to some degree, then there would be no predators, nor meat to eat, as we would not be able to best any of the animals that are out there, in any way, due to their equality to our own nature and ability.

Animals will chew off a limb to rescue themselves from capture, and cope with the pain, I highly doubt a shot to the heart or a rather solid bash to the head would truly make a difference to the animal life.

In conclusion, if an animal shows up and votes for president, or registers on these forums and posts their idea of "Why" to anything, then I will accept animal sentience and also accept that they have any true interest beyond eating and reproducing.

[anarchyisbliss]

I must say you would make a great politician.

unless one deems Cows and Chickens intelligent, and as such why are we eating them? If we were, by some inherent factor of creation, supposed to respect all of the animal kingdom, why do we eat most of it and kill the other half?

We eat them because our species is full of people like you who think it is okay to eat animals simply because they aren't as intelligent as us.

A lion is better than an antelope

That makes little sense. A lion might be better than an antelope in hunting, but I bet you an antelope is better than a lion at eating berries, or jumping, or running long distances, or is better at having the DNA of an antelope! To say one animal is better than the other is...stupid. Yes a lion is better at some things, but an antelope is better at others. You see - balance, equilibrium...equality.

On the topic of sentient beings, if you can find me a cow who, upon entering the knockerman's shed, panics and tries to run, then I will accept that Cows may be sentient. Unfortunately, the case is often that the cow meanders happily into the knockerman's shed, though all other cows come out the other side dead or as various choice select cuts.

Have you ever seen videos of slaughterhouses. The cows are strapped down, and many of them try to walk away but there is no where to walk. And this isn't a cartoon slaughterhouse where a cow goes in one end and bloody chunks of meat fly out the other end so the cows waiting in line might not have an idea of whats going to happen until its too late.

Animals, by simple observation, and scientific testing, tend to lack in what one would consider an Imagination, Logical processing ability, or any real sense of self.

I have observed animals and I know they have a sense of self. I have been raised with animals and maybe you haven't so you might not know, but look into an animals eyes and you will see the same glint that you would see in that of a human. P.S> that glint is more than just reflecting light.

It is a rare and seldom creature whom travels alone, such as a polar bear, but even this creature shows no function beyond eating and reproducing.

Wrong again ( why would I be surprised). Polar bears do much more than eat and reproduce. They care for their young for a very long amount of time and they teach them how to hunt. They pass on polar bear culture and values. And they enjoy their life despite their solidarity.

In conclusion, if an animal shows up and votes for president, or registers on these forums and posts their idea of "Why" to anything, then I will accept animal sentience and also accept that they have any true interest beyond eating and reproducing.

As far as I know humans are the only animals who do these things. That is because they are a part of our culture. You cant say " oh well animals aren't smart because they don't vote". Well voting isn't an issue for most animals. Go into a wolf pack and try ot chase a deer around on all fours and see how successful you are. I'm sure the wolves will becoming up with their own hypothesis based on their observations.

[Abiathar]

We eat them because our species is full of people like you who think it is okay to eat animals simply because they aren't as intelligent as us.

Now then, if I were an assumptive sort of person, I might think that was a personal attack as you have no idea what I think in my mind, you only see what I write, and if you will watch my posts I will argue either side of an issue. However, I know better than this, and even if so, it was simply an assumption based on the current viewpoint you have seen.

That makes little sense. A lion might be better than an antelope in hunting, but I bet you an antelope is better than a lion at eating berries, or jumping, or running long distances, or is better at having the DNA of an antelope! To say one animal is better than the other is...stupid. Yes a lion is better at some things, but an antelope is better at others. You see - balance, equilibrium...equality.

Yes indeed, however we were not discussing the eatting of berries or jumping, we were discussing the concept of fundamental superiority. A lion is stronger, faster, and honestly more intelligent than an antelope. The lion uses familial intuition and a pride instinct in its hunting, and shows a vast deal more coordination. In reference to the topic, a lion is a great deal superior to an antelope, no matter how well the antelope eats berries.

Actually, I have seen slaughterhouses, as I unfortunately live in Ft. Worth. They often have a trained cow walk in first, and the rest follow into the chutes. They are generally killed with a neumatic device that punches a hole through their brain almost instantly... they tend to simply fall over while still chewing cud.

I have observed animals and I know they have a sense of self. I have been raised with animals and maybe you haven't so you might not know, but look into an animals eyes and you will see the same glint that you would see in that of a human. P.S> that glint is more than just reflecting light.

A dog mimicing the eye expressions it has learned from a human master is not a glint of intelligence. Cats, while showing some basic statistical skills and a certain cleverness tend to lack on the Logical aspects, as do almost all animals. Granted, I am a firm believer in intuition over logic, I am also a firm believer that only Dolphins and Elephants rival us in intellect, and I do infact believe killing either is wrong.

Wrong again ( why would I be surprised). Polar bears do much more than eat and reproduce. They care for their young for a very long amount of time and they teach them how to hunt. They pass on polar bear culture and values. And they enjoy their life despite their solidarity.

I will simply direct you to Wikipedia, or any other easily obtained reference on Polar Bears, as they abandon their young once they come of age... all mamilian animals tend their young, this is simply a trait of animals that require milk upon birth, as there is no other way for the species to continue. Call it instinct.

As far as I know humans are the only animals who do these things. That is because they are a part of our culture. You cant say " oh well animals aren't smart because they don't vote". Well voting isn't an issue for most animals. Go into a wolf pack and try ot chase a deer around on all fours and see how successful you are. I'm sure the wolves will becoming up with their own hypothesis based on their observations.

This is, also, correct, and I never claimed that animals have no intelligence, but the belief that eating animals is wrong is almost patently absurd if we spend 20 minutes watching Animal Planet, or some other documentuary, on any animal in the animal kingdom. For every animal there is a predator, those that do not have predators are often predators. Animals eat animals, and unless one wishes to argue that it is not moral for the previously stated lion to eat the previously stated antelope, then you are doing one of two things:

A: Claiming humans are superior to the rest of the animal kingdom and should have restrictions on our predatorial behavior as we have more cognative ability to think through our actions.

or

B: You are issuing a refute to Nature as a whole.

[anarchyisbliss]

Quote: Yes indeed, however we were not discussing the eatting of berries or jumping, we were discussing the concept of fundamental superiority. A lion is stronger, faster, and honestly more intelligent than an antelope. The lion uses familial intuition and a pride instinct in its hunting, and shows a vast deal more coordination. In reference to the topic, a lion is a great deal superior to an antelope, no matter how well the antelope eats berries.

If we are talking about fundamental superiority then you could make a case for either the antelope or the lion. My rebuttal to you saying a lion is superior is that a lion wouldn't be good at eating berries or jumping or having antelope DNA etc. I'm basically saying that your claim that ANY animal could be "superior" is incorrect or just a matter of perspective.


Quote: A dog mimicking the eye expressions it has learned from a human master is not a glint of intelligence.

How not? How do you define intelligence? Regardless, the Dog is still as sentient as I am.


Quote: but the belief that eating animals is wrong is almost patently absurd if we spend 20 minutes watching Animal Planet, or some other documentuary, on any animal in the animal kingdom. For every animal there is a predator, those that do not have predators are often predators. Animals eat animals, and unless one wishes to argue that it is not moral for the previously stated lion to eat the previously stated antelope, then you are doing one of two things:

I understand that and I do not think eating animals is wrong. I think it is wrong to eat them because you think they don't deserve a right to life or because they are inferior to us. Which is basically the response I have been getting from a lot of people on this forum.

Quote: A: Claiming humans are superior to the rest of the animal kingdom and should have restrictions on our predatorial behavior as we have more cognative ability to think through our actions.

Trust me, I would never say that humans are superior beings.

P.S. If it felt like I was attacking you that is because I am an avid activist for animal equality and sometimes I just cant help myself in the face of arrogance and ignorance.

[Abiathar]

If you call me Arrogant and ignorant again, simply because I do not agree with you, I will very simply report you and be done with it. Just because I do not agree with you is no grounds to launch the varied personal attacks that you have leveled today.

No, any animal cannot claim superiority over another, in anything except for specific instances, and that is the diametric opposite of Fundamental. I spoke fundamental, and it appears the issue is that you are reading feeling behind something that I stated with an objective standpoint. Forgive me that I do not share your emotional attachment to the furry critters.

You are not debating, you are simply insulting those who respond in ways you disagree with until they stop posting in your threads, which is what I am currently going to do.

[anarchyisbliss]

If you call me Arrogant and ignorant again, simply because I do not agree with you, I will very simply report you and be done with it. Just because I do not agree with you is no grounds to launch the varied personal attacks that you have leveled today.

No, any animal cannot claim superiority over another, in anything except for specific instances, and that is the diametric opposite of Fundamental. I spoke fundamental, and it appears the issue is that you are reading feeling behind something that I stated with an objective standpoint. Forgive me that I do not share your emotional attachment to the furry critters.

You are not debating, you are simply insulting those who respond in ways you disagree with until they stop posting in your threads, which is what I am currently going to do.

I called you ignorant because I assumed that you were just one of the many humans who thinks that he or she is the ruler of all animals and that the poor little animals have no clue whats going on there fore they deserve to die. I think people need to stop being so punitive and cruel and STUPID and look into the eyes of any animal and see that it is alive!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is aware and it deserves life just as much as anyone on this planet!

[Abiathar]

You really should read my post in "Your overall philosophy" in General Philo.

[anarchyisbliss]

You really should read my post in "Your overall philosophy" in General Philo.

Thank you. I know I get heated sometimes ,but I just cant help but to express myself when I feel attacked. Although
It seemed like I was mostly attacking you.
I am surprised you took it so critically though based on your quote.

[Abiathar]

I often respond in like, normally if but for the fact that when angry people respond to anger, not to nicities, which on the whole often are treated with a violent reaction. Just understand, I do not consider people above anything, and I truly believe the fact that a random hydrogen atom has as much weight upon existance as I, you, or anyone else has.

I do not launch personal attacks, for the simple fact that I do not believe in telling someone they are ignorant, even if everyone else sees them so... there again I am the guy with the "Numbers" post, "Sacred Geometry" and other such things that no one A: gets or B: wants to talk about/accept :p My mind works in odd ways, and you can assume that anything that I post on these boards that is a response to another post will be, honestly, without any real emotion from myself... why invoke emotion online? no one can see it.

[anarchyisbliss]

I often respond in like, normally if but for the fact that when angry people respond to anger, not to nicities, which on the whole often are treated with a violent reaction. Just understand, I do not consider people above anything, and I truly believe the fact that a random hydrogen atom has as much weight upon existance as I, you, or anyone else has.

I do not launch personal attacks, for the simple fact that I do not believe in telling someone they are ignorant, even if everyone else sees them so... there again I am the guy with the "Numbers" post, "Sacred Geometry" and other such things that no one A: gets or B: wants to talk about/accept :p My mind works in odd ways, and you can assume that anything that I post on these boards that is a response to another post will be, honestly, without any real emotion from myself... why invoke emotion online? no one can see it.

Its amazing. You may not realize it, but we are so similar, and we basically have the same view point but I didn't even realize it. We wasted all of that time fighting when we could have doing something productive. I generally don't like to launch personal attacks in real life I guess this computer screen makes me feel safe.

[Abiathar]

I find that it is often the case that people will say more what comes directly to mind when typing than when speaking. Believe me, I argue with anyone, on the simple premise that when arguing with someone, even if angrily, people think more as they attempt to retort. In this, really, I assist in the matter by arguing with you.

[anarchyisbliss]

I find that it is often the case that people will say more what comes directly to mind when typing than when speaking. Believe me, I argue with anyone, on the simple premise that when arguing with someone, even if angrily, people think more as they attempt to retort. In this, really, I assist in the matter by arguing with you.

Thanks, you would be a better mentor than politician now that Ive met you.

[donnasexup]

javascript:emoticon(':roll:')