Because that's what makes the difference between a pet and a livestock.

Yeah, that's why we needed to steal from the Native Americans, they were savages turning away from their nature! Quit throwing terms like human nature around. What a stupid effing overused clichè phrase that really boils down to, "it's unchangeable, so oh well." When it isn't, and makes us look like morons trying to justify our actions. There is no bloody justification for our treatment of animals. We are not superior, we are not better, the Universe DOES NOT revolve around us, and if we disappeared off the face of the planet only positive benefits to the ecosystem would result.

Bloody bumblebees have more importance than us. Quit being so self-righteous and bigoted about how we're predators and their prey. That's not the case. We're totalitarian oppressors, and they're the victims. The best part is that it is all in the name of profit.

"All the arguments to prove man's superiority cannot shatter this hard fact: in suffering the animals are our equals." - Peter Singer

Humans are creatures of sin; well most of us anyways.

I think pet(s) and food(s) are ways apart by definition.

What about during slavery in the US? Weren't those people pets?

Nowhere did I say human nature is 'unchangeable, oh well', no where am I saying we should treat animals poorly, I'm firmly on the opposite side of that debate. I did not say or imply any of these things, you have just start going on and on about things I haven't even said nor intended to say...

Now, let's look at this again shall we?
This is hardly a controversial statement (unless you are one of those creationist-fundies...). Nature revolves around the premise that the strong prey on the weak. This is how natural selection works, without this mechanism we never would have evolved. Humans have been birthed out of this vicious process. Almost all of nature still follows this very cycle... It isn't until mammalian classes evolved that altruism became beneficial for survival and was favoured by natural selection. That's why you see altruism primarily in mammalian classes and very rarely in the older classes, such as reptiles, insects, etc.

Aaand this is why humans have altruistic tendencies yet are still plagued with very selfish tendencies as well, because we were born out of this process... This is why we have to fight it, because for something like 99% of our ancestral evolution altruism was nowhere to be seen. Preying on the weak is something that is deeply ingrained.

Please, in your next reply, reply only to what I have actually said...

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 17 2011, 6:04 pm by CecilSunkure. Reason: Removed unnecessary phrases.

@Cecil
I was thinking more of animals than anything else but yes by definition they're pets. But i don't consider slaves pets since pets usually have a love relationship towards their owner.

Sacrieur, your argument is that we aren't superior to animals, and shouldn't act as such.

So what your saying is, we should all act like animals. In that case I'm going to take off all my clothes, run around naked outside, grunt an howl, and poop wherever I want. Then I'm going to chase down some other smaller animal and kill it for food, and eat it raw! After I've gotten my fill of the bunny I just killed, I'm going to go start a fight with the next male human I see to establish dominance and if I win I'll have sex with every female in sight.

If you really believe we are smart enough to not act on instinct, you are also saying that we are superior to animals.

I know, obviously the Native Americans were not being treated like animals, but they were at a disadvantage. Eventually the Natives learned to speak the languages of the Europeans, and they blended into society. On the other hand, animals can't talk, hold jobs, and drive cars. They are not the same.
Animals aren't smart enough to know that they are being raised for food. They can feel pain.

But being cruel to animals is just pointless. If the workers at a slaughterhouse are beating the chickens, they should be replaced, because, #1 They are immature enough to find that amusing. #2 They are ruining perfectly good meat. #3 They are wasting company time.

Leave it up to humans to establish the concept of "morality" so they can justify their god complex.

What separates humans from animals is the ability to reason.

I hate how everyone is dumbing human downs to evil, selfish beings. If we're so aware of this then why don't we change it? We've overcame many things such as slavery...atleast on the developed world. Of course the undeveloped world is gonna stick some time in their anarchist times, but as developed countries can't we overcome this?

Then again animals are tied to economics...(then again so was slavery)

If they actually did it to may the chicken feel comfortable it would cost someone a small fortune to eat food.

Lets has an example of devalued food as a positive; runescape (i know troll me) the price of lobsters skyrocked when free trade was taken out. This caused lobsters to rise from about 200 to 400. When stiles and free trade was re-introduced lobsters fell to about 100 which is good since you have more food and even the poor can have it. (yes rs is like the stock market <3)

If say for the cost of a tv would become the daily cost of food, imagining this then we would see people basically starve. Yes our system is flawed but at least it works.

@Ezterix
Yes i agree with you animals nowadays are like slaves. But how do you deem something that you can eat or not? Does its intelligence have to be subpar or non existent? Can you eat it if it felt no pain in its life? or is it innocence (not knowing about it)

Dolphins, chimpanzees, and even mice all have the ability to reason. If you mean we're sentient and conscious of our own existence, we're not alone in that either, dolphins have the same trait. In fact, a number of scientists and philosophers believe they are people, and should be treated as such. The evidence for this is quite overwhelming.


People are not greedy in societies where resources are plentiful or the society does not force productivity (profit). See: Native Americans.


In a nutshell.


Now where did you get that idea? It's like a strawman and reductio ad absurdum rolled into one. First off, even if this were the case, it does not make my argument any less valid. Second, it's not the case. Not every animal is as you describe. Hell, most animals aren't as you describe. Apes don't even do what you describe. There are lots of relatively peaceful animals, like elephants and whales. You seem to have it in your head that all animals are a certain way, that it is demeaning, which I guess is partially due to culture. This is nothing short of silly. We are animals, and ergo act like animals (because that's what we are; we define what acting like an animal is).

More specifically, we act like humans. Which are rather sophisticated creatures that build complex tools. Not wanting to be lumped into the rest of the animals is like some superiority complex. When really, we're hardly different. The similarities between us and every other bloody animal we have come into contact with is so incredible I don't even know how people can deny they don't fit into the same category, usually invoking something supernatural into the mix to justify it. This usually stems from the fact that we have souls or what have you. The funny part is that there is no real mention of our soul-ship making us non-animals in a holy book. And if there is, point it out to me. And none of this speculation stuff, I want definitive proof, not something that can be held in equal favor with another view (granting that the holy book is true, of course).


Not quite. We are superior in intelligence, insomuch as reason, pattern recognition, processing, language, memory, and etc. To go from this to show that we are superior period is another jump entirely. We are rather weak in the animal kingdom. We're not even great generalists, and our generalist abilities only stem from our creative use of what we do have. We cannot see, touch, hear, smell, or taste as well as other animals. We must build tools and augmentations to compensate.

Other animals don't act purely on instinct, and most have a limited capacity to think on some complex levels. Like dolphins or chimps. Apes use tools, and teach this to their young. Clearly this is not instinct.


They were not treated like animals? Perhaps you should take a closer look at that whole manifest destiny thing and see for yourself. We called them savages and performed genocide. This of course isn't taught in our history classes. And yes, animals can feel pain just as much as we do.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not out to stop the eating of animals. We are predators, I cannot deny this fact. And we do live well on meat. The point is that what we're doing to them is just plain wrong. Yes, we're going to eat some cows, but at least give them some nice green pastures and treat them well. It's better for us too, what with good quality meat.


I keep asking this question. If I grew up in the early 1800s, would I be okay with slavery, or would I oppose it? The majority of Americans were okay with it (except the slaves). I'd like to think 100 years from now when teenagers look back on us they'll find our treatment of animals absolutely absurd.


Detroit agrees. It is definitely working.

In addition to not apologizing about your mistake before you have gone ahead and made the exact same mistake. Where, anywhere, did I say anything about humans being greedy when resources are plentiful/society does not force productivity/whatever? I said humans have altruistic tendencies and are plagued with selfish tendencies as well.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 17 2011, 6:05 pm by CecilSunkure. Reason: You don't need multiple periods or question marks for a sin

It had nothing to do what you saying anything about it. It was a point raised by me to counter your bold points.

Well it is hardly a counter of any worth. 99%(ish) of our ancestral evolution altruism WAS nowhere to be seen. You can't possibly dispute that.

Clearly undisputable.

I am saying that for 99% of our evolution altruism was nowhere to be seen... How does this article refute that? You are supposed to explain links not just post them on their own.

Can't read the abstract? It demonstrates that altruism is a "hardwired" trait in the brain that actually causes a person pleasure. It occurs in the medial orbitofrontal–subgenual and lateral orbitofrontal areas, known to be primitive areas of the brain. This suggests that altruism developed early in humans. Altruism can also be seen by other animals, such as gorillas, birds, and especially dolphins, who even protect humans from sharks.

Well maybe you do not realize what I am saying when I say "our evolution". I mean from today all the way back to the beginning of life. In that huge timespan as we slowly evolved for almost all of it altruism was nowhere to be seen. This is what I am referring to when I say you cannot possibly dispute this. And that is why I am confused when you posted a link that did nothing to show the contrary.

As for the part where you are saying altruism is seen in other animals I already talked about mammalian altruism several posts back.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 17 2011, 6:09 pm by CecilSunkure. Reason: Cmon, have some respect.

You should clarify this. And surprisingly, bacteria show hints of altruism under certain stressful conditions.

It isn't altruism unless you intend to give someone something else at some cost to yourself. Bacteria can't think, therefore they can't be altruistic. They simply exhibit behavior that is not negative to self but beneficial to to others.

They got science and philosophy on board with the whole animals are people thing? They have overwhelming evidence? I don't want to be left on the stupid train; count me in on your half-baked ethics!

You know what I mean by reason. Chimpanzees don't sit on message boards arguing whether eating pigs is immoral or not. They can solve some kinds of problems and use tools. They are primitive beings and are morally inferior to humans.