Announcement

Collapse

Philosophy 201 Guidelines

Cogito ergo sum

Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Killing animals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Killing animals

    Sometimes I wonder when it is morally acceptable to kill animals. Since humans are mentally more capable than animals, it makes sense that a human life is worth more than an animal life. So animal killing should be justifiable in terms of self defense. But is human life enough more valuable than animal life to justify things like eating meat and wearing fur or leather clothing? Eating meat is definitely more convenient than trying to find protein (or other nutrients typically gotten from animals) from other sources, and it tastes good. Similarly, fur and leather can look or feel nice. But I'm not sure how to figure out if that's enough to justify killing an animal. On the opposite end from self defense there is animal cruelty; harming animals for pleasure. I think we can all agree that that is wrong, because if nothing else, we as a society do not want to encourage sadism. When killing is acceptable also depends on the type of animal. Insects are so unintelligent that it seems as though killing them would only be bad if it causes significant damage to the ecosystem. Similarly, fish seem less intelligent than other animals, so it's hard for me to find an issue with eating well-farmed fish.
    What are your thoughts on the matter?
    Find my speling strange? I'm trying this out: Simplified Speling. Feel free to join me.

    "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do."-Jeremy Bentham

    "We question all our beliefs, except for the ones that we really believe in, and those we never think to question."-Orson Scott Card

  • #2
    Originally posted by stfoskey15 View Post
    Sometimes I wonder when it is morally acceptable to kill animals. Since humans are mentally more capable than animals, it makes sense that a human life is worth more than an animal life. So animal killing should be justifiable in terms of self defense. But is human life enough more valuable than animal life to justify things like eating meat and wearing fur or leather clothing? Eating meat is definitely more convenient than trying to find protein (or other nutrients typically gotten from animals) from other sources, and it tastes good. Similarly, fur and leather can look or feel nice. But I'm not sure how to figure out if that's enough to justify killing an animal. On the opposite end from self defense there is animal cruelty; harming animals for pleasure. I think we can all agree that that is wrong, because if nothing else, we as a society do not want to encourage sadism. When killing is acceptable also depends on the type of animal. Insects are so unintelligent that it seems as though killing them would only be bad if it causes significant damage to the ecosystem. Similarly, fish seem less intelligent than other animals, so it's hard for me to find an issue with eating well-farmed fish.
    What are your thoughts on the matter?
    Humans evolved as opportunistic omnivores, basically adapted over the millennia a adapting to many combinations of food sources all over the world. Our digestive system evolved to this diet and not well adapted to being a vegetarian nor a carnivore. Nutrients like B12 for the most part is only available in meat products. Unlike other vegetarian animals that are capable of producing their own B12.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by stfoskey15 View Post
      Sometimes I wonder when it is morally acceptable to kill animals. Since humans are mentally more capable than animals, it makes sense that a human life is worth more than an animal life. So animal killing should be justifiable in terms of self defense. But is human life enough more valuable than animal life to justify things like eating meat and wearing fur or leather clothing? Eating meat is definitely more convenient than trying to find protein (or other nutrients typically gotten from animals) from other sources, and it tastes good. Similarly, fur and leather can look or feel nice. But I'm not sure how to figure out if that's enough to justify killing an animal. On the opposite end from self defense there is animal cruelty; harming animals for pleasure. I think we can all agree that that is wrong, because if nothing else, we as a society do not want to encourage sadism. When killing is acceptable also depends on the type of animal. Insects are so unintelligent that it seems as though killing them would only be bad if it causes significant damage to the ecosystem. Similarly, fish seem less intelligent than other animals, so it's hard for me to find an issue with eating well-farmed fish.
      What are your thoughts on the matter?
      From a outsider assuming a naturalistic perspective, to me, there is precious little difference between a cucumber and a cow. Both are organic and edible. Both qualify as "alive". Both fit into our evolved diet. Both have to die in order to be eaten. I don't see why intelligence of the species matters. From a Christian perspective, God gave us both to eat as long as we do so with thanksgiving. I see no problem with eating animals.

      Hunting for sport is a bit more nuanced. Since we humans have upset the natural balance between predator/prey, herds can (and do) get out of control and cause devastation to the ecosystem, not to mention the increased risk of disease spreading.

      Harming animals for fun is morally wrong no matter what angle you look at it.
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
        From a outsider assuming a naturalistic perspective, to me, there is precious little difference between a cucumber and a cow. Both are organic and edible. Both qualify as "alive". Both fit into our evolved diet. Both have to die in order to be eaten. I don't see why intelligence of the species matters. From a Christian perspective, God gave us both to eat as long as we do so with thanksgiving. I see no problem with eating animals.

        Hunting for sport is a bit more nuanced. Since we humans have upset the natural balance between predator/prey, herds can (and do) get out of control and cause devastation to the ecosystem, not to mention the increased risk of disease spreading.

        Harming animals for fun is morally wrong no matter what angle you look at it.
        Yeah
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #5
          I've always been an advocate of eating what you hunt.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #6
            I personally have frequently wrestled with eating red meat and pork given that I believe mammals have intelligence. Poultry is less of an issue for me though I again wrestle with environmental concerns and tend to eat only certain types of chicken. (It has to be grown a certain way pasturized a certain way) We buy eggs off the farms here, you get the idea. I don't so much have issues with fish and shellfish. However at the same time B-12 isn't readily obtained unless you eat red meat and same with iron, although since I eat dark meat from poultry I dont have much of an issue here. and I regularly eat certain products with b-12 or fortified.....meh, leave it to a person to decide for themselves. Like everyone else here, killing for sport is totally wrong, Animals are not trophies.
            A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
            George Bernard Shaw

            Comment


            • #7
              My issue is snakes.

              I think it's important to know which ones are poisonous and pose a threat, and which ones are harmless.

              By "pose a threat" - I mean, for example, a poisonous snake on my property where my grandkids play or my dog runs. I'll kill that snake every chance I get.

              It's not that difficult to identify the "bad" snakes. I know people who say "if it's a snake, it needs to die".
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                I've always been an advocate of eating what you hunt.
                I hunted down a packet of crisps this morning. Tasted good.
                Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  My issue is snakes.
                  For eating?
                  Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                  MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                  MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                  seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    My issue is snakes.

                    I think it's important to know which ones are poisonous and pose a threat, and which ones are harmless.

                    By "pose a threat" - I mean, for example, a poisonous snake on my property where my grandkids play or my dog runs. I'll kill that snake every chance I get.

                    It's not that difficult to identify the "bad" snakes. I know people who say "if it's a snake, it needs to die".
                    Do you know a good way, short of having a gun, to kill poisonous snakes? We've seen some at our local places for fishing. We could tell because their body floated on top of the water. Lucky for us they were far away. In the future though, it might be a good idea to have a plan if they get too close.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                      Do you know a good way, short of having a gun, to kill poisonous snakes? We've seen some at our local places for fishing. We could tell because their body floated on top of the water. Lucky for us they were far away. In the future though, it might be a good idea to have a plan if they get too close.
                      In the vast majority of the time when dealing with wild animals, I've found that if you don't startle or corner an animal they much prefer to be far away from you. The old truism holds true "They're more scared of you than you are of them". When we lived in San Diego I would mountain bike around in the hills and mountains and came across many rattlers and never had any trouble because as I approached they vacated the area as fast as they could.
                      We know J6 wasn’t peaceful because they didn’t set the building on fire.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                        Do you know a good way, short of having a gun, to kill poisonous snakes? We've seen some at our local places for fishing. We could tell because their body floated on top of the water. Lucky for us they were far away. In the future though, it might be a good idea to have a plan if they get too close.
                        Run. Very fast.


                        Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I'd have much less trouble ethically eating shrimp than eating chimp. Maybe it's because chimps are much more like us than shrimp. But I think it has to do with the complexity of the brain/nervous system, the richness of their experiences and their relations with other members of their species. Chimps appear tp have self-awareness; shrimp probably do not.

                          If an alien species as far advanced form us intellectually as we are to chickens, were to land, would it be morally okay for them to eat us?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by alaskazimm View Post
                            In the vast majority of the time when dealing with wild animals, I've found that if you don't startle or corner an animal they much prefer to be far away from you. The old truism holds true "They're more scared of you than you are of them". When we lived in San Diego I would mountain bike around in the hills and mountains and came across many rattlers and never had any trouble because as I approached they vacated the area as fast as they could.
                            Not the case with water moccasins. They will just keep going where they want to regardless of what's going on.

                            Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                            Run. Very fast.
                            Not sure I'll have that option.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                              Not the case with water moccasins. They will just keep going where they want to regardless of what's going on.
                              Never had the pleasure of meeting one. That said the best part of living in Alaska is the severe lack of snakes in the wilderness; we only have to deal with the occasional grizzly or love struck moose.
                              We know J6 wasn’t peaceful because they didn’t set the building on fire.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
                              172 responses
                              586 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seer
                              by seer
                               
                              Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
                              21 responses
                              137 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Working...
                              X