The Ethics of Eating Non-Human Animals

[Salmonberries]

[GodzillaDeuce]

[avelanch]

this thread makes me want foie gras.... not sure why.

[Pouria]

And moral values are things we can know. We know they are properties which supervene on states of affairs e.g. moral wrongness supervenes on an act of rape. That means they are cognitive in nature. That means they can be true or false. That means if rape is wrong, you ought not to do it. It is the sensible thing to do.

In any event, you only begged the question because you provided no argument showing that moral values are non-cognitive in nature.

It has become apparent that you are out to lunch. The video displays states of affairs. States of affairs are what is the case. What is the case are facts. Hence, the video displays facts.

Now exactly what is an appeal to emotion:

source

It is common practice to dehorn livestock. source. And the practice can cause significant agony. The videos are evidential support for /topic/336595-the-ethics-of-eating-non-human-animals/">my arguments because i) they show how cattle dehorning is commonly practiced and ii) cattle dehorning does cause significant agony.

The videos are clearly evidential support fr this claim: given the agony cattle dehorning causes weighed against the reasons for subjecting animals to it, we have sufficient moral reasons not to act this way.

Hence, it is not an appeal to emotion.

Stop arguing about this unless you enjoy thinking like a nincompoop.

Given what I have shown above this is a non sequitur on your part. Given how difficult it is for you to understand what facts are, I'm not surprised you don't apply fallacies properly either.

In other words, the moral wrongness of the videos isn't predicated on emotion. The support the arguments I've given because they show what is the case.

Funny that you say this and yet somehow I've managed to complete a masters degree in philosophy on this very topic. In any event, rather than point fingers, you need to think more carefully. And change your name.

[Salmonberries]

big meat eater just went to the top of the list of movies to watch

[Pouria]

I mean that biologically humans eat meat. When found in our natural environment (some remote tribes actually do still exist) humans hunt and consume meat. Our digestive systems are made to consume it. A healthy, natural diet includes meat. It is also a part of many cultures.

Obviously suffering to animals should be minimized. That's why people like Temple Grandin are respected.

That it can not be eliminated does not mean that eating meat must be eliminated.

[ronthecivil]

You are only partially right in a particular sense. Biologically speaking, an argument can be made that humans evolved eating meat. That led to evolutionary adaptations such as brain size, etc. This is a fact that I don't dispute. However, that fact is quite different from the claim about whether it is biologically necessary to eat meat. Obviously it isn't, and even high performance athletes don't need to. Protein, however, is necessary to sustain a healthy diet. So what you should have said, is that a healthy, natural diet includes protein.

Precision Nutrition has a two part article about plant based diets geared specificlly for high performance athletes/fitness types. If you don't know much about nutrition, you should find it informative.

Yes. So based on this, wouldn't eating meat that comes from factory farms fly in the face of minimizing suffering to animals? Shouldn't you at least try to exclude meat produced by these practices?

Not sure I follow you here. I don't think I ever said that eating must be eliminated, all together. Certain practices e.g. factory farming, ought to be.

It has nothing to do with "moral superiority". It has to do with doing the right thing. If that means recognizing the sensible and intelligent thing to do and acting rationally in accordance with these beliefs, then I guess yeah, some of us are intelligent whereas others are stupid. I used to eat meat before. I didn't really know any better. But once I realized how animals produced for meat are treated, the choice was easy. Sometimes you gotta face the facts.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Ok there's very little you've said here that is correct so lets go through it.

The video uses local anesthetics AND it is performed by a veternarian. By contrast, common practices for cattle dehorning do NOT use local anesthetics OR have it performed by veternarians (who have a professional obligation to mitigate animal suffering).

[ronthecivil]

I agree. Humans are technically omnivores (closely associated with carnivores) and their body is designed to consume both meat and plants as food. In fact, most herbivores have large cecum with large number of bacteria which would help in the enzymatic breakdown of plant materials like cellulose. While the body of carnivores or a human has reduced cecum. There is a reason why we can't properly digest some plants such as corns or beans. There is a reason why we have four canine teeth and incisors for grinding and tearing. We are designed to consume meat and our body functions optimally when we do have meat in our diet. Obviously we could also function with just eating plants too, since our body is designed for consumption of both plants and meat.

[thepedestrian]

That video above was really silly. That is how you dehorn a large animal though. Its a frack up though and expensive. That vet costs alot to pay and that video doesn't show how long it really takes a vet to do it. Plus animals with horns are kind of assholes for the rest of their life because they've learned that if they smash their head around they can bully the other animals. You want to do them when they are young. Between 3-7 days with caustic paste. Xylazine is used as a sedative on many farms. Why? The animal doesn't rub off all the paste. It turns out the best way to minimize the calves "agony" is also the cheapest and most profitable.

Another thing that they're also doing is breeding for animals born without horns to lose the cost all togethor. This is not very common yet.

[D-Money]

Silly Goose seems to be obsessed with getting meat from horny animals.

[avelanch]

The more cows we eat the less methane they get to release (especially veal), and the less impact on climate change. Vegans are destroying the world by trying to preserve cows and their methane production, melting the ice caps and killing polar bears.

[Angry Goose]

The problem is you keep saying the video you posted is common practice when in reality that's not the truth. Now having said that farms that practice that method should be avoided all together. Most large farms that mass produce do not use the method you posted because it is inefficient even with the small added cost but again big, medium or small if they are not taking care of their product then they should be avoided.

[avelanch]

I didn't say that the wire method in the video specifically is common practice. Cow dehorning without local anesthetics is. That coupled with cowdehorning in general is common practice. Go read through my posts and do I say anything about the wire method specifically? NO. Again, you are mischaracterizing my position.

If you want clarification e.g. "are you saying that the wire method is common practice?" all you have to do is ask.

Cow dehorning with a soldering iron

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/undercover-video-cow-dehorning-9660948

Quite painful looking if you ask me.

Consider these facts:

Source

So local anesthetics are not common.

source

Dehorning calves is preferable, and it is statisticly more common on large dairy farms (500+ cows). Even so, it is quite painful. Ask Temple Grandin:

So where does this leave us? Cow dehorning is painful without anesthics. That is common practice. We do it so we can use animals for food. Ethically speaking that is not justified.

[thepedestrian]

So where does this leave us? Cow dehorning is painful without anesthics. That is common practice. We do it so we can use animals for food. Ethically speaking that is not justified.

[Angry Goose]

just as a point of contention, we do it so they don't kill each other, not so we can use them for food. with or without the meat industry cows would be dehorned, unless you are trying to say they should just be released into the wild to become food for wild animals...

The Horns can pose a risk to humans, to other animals, and to the bearers of the horns themselves (horns are sometimes caught in fences or prevent proper feeding).

[Monty]

I really wish there was a Fuddruckers outside my office window right now.

[Angry Goose]

Make sure you buy your meat from a farm that uses the paste/anesthetic then. Problem solved.

[goalie13]

But do most people do this? No. Most people don't even recognize this as morally obligatory.

Further, I've mentioned that it is unclear whether painless killing makes slaughtering animals for morally permissable. If I painlessly killed my cat because I think a fur hat would looko good, would the painless killing be sufficient justification? The experiences an animal has seem important. Whether those experiences are important to the animal itself is another discussion.

[Salmonberries]

The more cows we eat the less methane they get to release (especially veal), and the less impact on climate change. Vegans are destroying the world by trying to preserve cows and their methane production, melting the ice caps and killing polar bears.