technicalities of suffering

[suzy_99]

Sorry for the confusion before, I was simply talking about the human mind, not the animal mind. I also beleive that pain is real, but our perception of it can differ greatly from person to person and even from animal to animal. However, since most animal minds are not yet capable of complex discipline like ours, it really is not convenient to think that they would be able to learn how to react to pain in any manner other than what their instincts have taught them. Pain, then, in the animal community is more of a reflex then it is in humans.
Back to the original subject at hand though, after all of this discussion, it is still my opinion that harming an animal that cannot "feel" it is not actually suffering per say (it is still wrong). Sparky talked about the "farming" of brain dead animals. This is not actually possible. Brain dead animals would not survive long enough for us to farm them. People that are brain dead are able to survive because of technological advancements that help us to breath, eat, and so on. Animals do not have this luxury, if they suffer an injury that causes the brain to die, the body will follow shortly.

Another question that is closely related to Sparly's would be: Would it be better to drug an animal with tranquilizers before it was killed so that it would pretty much guarantee that no pain would be felt?? This way any maltreatement towards that animal will not make him or her suffer more than necessary.

[Sparky]

well it's not just the killing, it's the entire life, a stalk of corn could spend its entire life in unsuitable conditions, but it cant consciously feel the pain. just from a hypothetical standpoint, if you could raise animals, for food, that were completely incapable of recognizing suffering in any way, would it be wrong? and if yes, how would they be any different from plants?

[suzy_99]

If they had absolutely no brain activity and were not the least bit aware of the outside, then technically it wouldn't be wrong in that particular case. But, people get into habits very easily. Say that a certain worker at this "farm" decides to go work at a farm with normal animals, then this worker will be much more likely to practice inhumane treatment towards the live animals and with any pets that this person has.
If an animals is completely brain dead but kept alive more meat purposes only, then truly it is not much different than plants because it no longer has a working nervous system, which is what enables us to be like we are. The difference is that this animal was prabably born completely normal, while plants are never "born" with a nervous system.
This is a complicated question and there is never going to be a definite right or wrong answer, but any maltreatment of animals is wrong, even if the animal is already dead or whatever, because this just leads to more maltreatment, which may progress to perfectly healthy animals and then maybe even people.

[Rachy1412]

How can you compare the killing of plants to the killing and suffering of animals? They are completely different! Plants do not feel pain, they don't even have a brain. You cannot farm a load of brain dead animals.. that is just silly and probably even worse! How would you like to live ALL your life brain dead, not aware of all the horrible things that are happening to you. Yes you would not realize and you would not care but that is even more cruel than doing it to someone who is aware.

If a friend of yours became brain dead you wouldn't operate on them alive.. you wouldn't start abusing them just because you could get away with it, so why should we do it to animals. People say that humans are superior(sp?) but I really don't think we are. We would not stand five minutes in the wild like the animals. We would also not stand five minutes being abused like animals are.

This may sound rude and harsh but I have to say it. Sparky time and time again you post your opinions on the kitchen forum, you then complain when people get upset with you and yet you still continue to post here. You seem to wind them up! And now it seems that you are trying to justify the killing and suffering of animals. You know that this board is 100% agaisn't animal cruelty and suffering in ANY way. They are also nearly all vegi's, so why do you continue to keep trying to justify the reasons for it when you know that it is just not welcome!

[Access]

A brain-dead 'animal' wouldn't be a naturally occuring animal, it would be a human creation. Taking a normal cow, removing the brain, and putting it on life-support in order sustain it to the point where it can be slaughtered for meat; or removing part of the brain -- to create an 'organism' that would not be capable of suffering would be prohibitively expensive, not to mention no less objectionable by most people.

But with science and biotechnology being what it is, someday in the future we may be able to create a 'cow' born with a very minimal brain, one capable of sustaining life but not capable of feeling pain. Or, better yet, a plant which produces fruit chemically identical to cow meat, colonies of bacteria that do the same, etc.

[Ly&Pigs]

Sparky, you were sent a private message by me on 3-10 about your not using proper capitalization and sent a link regarding the posting rules. I have noticed that you continually ignore that message and do not capitalize properly. I am now issuing a formal warning to you to follow the rules.

[Sparky]

Sorry, i'll try and keep my spelling up to par in the future

i'm not asking about whether it is technically possible, i'm talking about it on a moral basis. if animals were no different, mentally, from plants, ie. not capable of cognitively recognizing their pain. they why would it still be wrong?

how does one differentiate?

[Ly&Pigs]

(Puts hand over mouth to keep from screaming really loud here)

Sparky I did NOT say spelling. I said you need to use proper capitalization. Meaning, capitalize your I's and capitalize the first letter of each sentence. Maybe you should re-read my last post again.

[Sparky]

Gee, I'm sorry

I'll try

[CavySpirit]

Sparky, I'm developing a very low tolerance for your posts anyway. This is also a notice that you may soon be demoted to Cavy Person from Cavy Slave.

[Sparky]

Well, if all you want is a discussion forum where you can sit around and agree with each other, then i guess i have no place here.

Honestly though, it's almost fascism

bye kids

[CavySpirit]

Call it what you want. This is not a general, public, anything goes forum. This is a forum for people who care very much about their animals. That is quite clear. I love debate. I encourage it. But, we do NOT need these kinds of topics here. Take them somewhere else. Bye Sparky.

[Susan9608]

I think that there is an inherent, moral difference between taking the life of a stalk of corn and taking the life of an animal, whether than animal is congnizant of pain and suffering or in a completely vegetative state. Human beings *are* animals; we are simply another species of animal that exists on this planet, and to me, that makes all the difference in the world. It is wrong to do cruel, painful things to any animal, regardless of species, because we are all animals and should accord each other the respect that likeness deserves. No one would perform potentially painful procedures on a vegetative, comatose human being - why should it be any different for another species of animal? All animals should at least be given the respect and dignity for being an animal and being alive ...

As for the stalk of corn, it is a plant ... alive, but not in the same way that animals are alive. Plants have no capacity to experience pain, loneliness, happiness, love, or anything other than self-survival. There is no brain to house emotions or nervous system to carry pain perception. And that to me, defines the essence of the difference between plants and animals.

All the hypotheticals in the world don't change reality - plants don't feel or experience the way animals do. Plants are different than animals, and thus, different from humans.

[Access]

But humans are also different than animals, for instance animals do not have discussions like the ones we are having now. A lion does not debate the morality of killing the deer, or even consider that he should kill the deer in a way to minimize its suffering, he just kills it with barely a thought. We are human because we care about these things, while animals just follow their instincts or training for the most part.

[mncavylover]

Different, yes. The argument that I've seen so often that we are superior, therefore, we can do whatever the heck we want with animals (just bringing this up)--I don't see where this has any backing. People like to use this to justify what they are doing, but it just doesn't work.

Also, perhaps the brains of other species would develop more, over time, if their basic needs were first met. Just a thought. While they can't even be sure of the neccessities, how can they focus on anything else? Maybe I'm wrong, but who knows?

[Susan9608]

Of course, there are differences between other animals and humans ... just like a dog is different from a cat and like a whale is different from a monkey. But we're all animals - that's the point I was trying to make. Plants are plants ... and animals, including human, are animals .... so it's not fair to draw a comparison between the so-called "suffering" of plant life and the morality of the suffering of animals, of any species.

[mncavylover]

Exactly. Well-said, Susan.