| Re: technicalities of suffering Well, judging by the previous response, I would consider that most people here would constitute pain by the conscious feeling of pain, Right?? Well, plants can feel, but they cannot vocalize their pain in the way that we can. When a plant is in need of sun, it points itself towards the sun. When it has no water, it begins to droop. Is this not a reaction. All animals have the exact same type reactions. Pain is a psychological reaction to an external stimulus and nothing more. Bleeding, brusing, clotting, and so on are the body actual reactions to something that causes it discomfort or a type of injury. In this way, the idea of pain and suffering is very subjective to personal opinion. Do I believe that it is wrong to kill plants...no. But it is not because they cannot feel it, because their bodies do feel it, so this is not a logical argument against this point. It is because they do not have a conscious awareness of what it occuring to them. Their reactions are simply reflexes to their environment. Saying this, I must point out that an animal that is brain dead would not be aware of the pain, so to be technical, he would not really be suffering, but I find this wrong because I don't believe that people should torture animals. Torturing animals have been proven to be a warning sign of future violent acts, as many serial killers started by torturing animals. So would it really be wrong to horrendously kill a brain dead animal... If I look at it from a purely scientific view, then no, because he or she cannot feel it so technically there is no pain, as pain is psychological and the reactions are physical. But moraly, it is wrong, because even though the animal cannot feel it, it is having an effect on the person who is doing the torturing. That person is either already severely disturbed or is headed down that path. |