= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobbBB comments on Why Eat Less Meat? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (513)
My other comment was downvoted below the troll level, so I'll ask here. Suppose we found a morphine-like drug which effectively and provably wireheads chickens to be happy with their living conditions, and with no side effects for humans consuming the meat. Would that answer your arguments about suffering?
This is not at all an unrealistic possibility. It probably will be via gene knockout rather than a drug injection, if it happens. See Adam Shriver, "Knocking Out Pain in Livestock: Can Technology Succeed Where Morality Has Stalled?"
If this doesn't happen, it will probably be either because lab-grown meat ended up being cheaper to mass-produce, or because the people strongly pushing for animal rights were too squeamish to recognize the value of this option.
Previously discussed here at Overcoming Bias. (I also remember Michael Anissimov responding, but I can't find that.)
Also, you're certainly optimistic about advancing from chickens having a reduced experience of pain to their being undisputedly proven to be happy with all aspects of their experience.
Thanks, it's a great link. I didn't know that it is possible to manipulate pain affect separately from pain sensitivity on a genetic level. I wonder how animal rights advocates react to this approach.
I woudn;t hasten to describe them a confused. How about the modest proposal of growing acephalus humans for consumption? Is that too far down the slope?
Nitpick: 'anencephalic'. 'cephalon' is head, 'encephalon' is brain.
Given only the two options, I think I'd rather humans grown for consumption not have heads than have them.
Well, currently it's even prohibited for organ replacement, for knee-jerk reasons.
My brain really, really, really wanted to read "knee jerky" there.
I wonder about my brain sometimes.
Actually, I suspect (but am not certain, hence the questioning) that this falls in one of those areas where some humans genuinely differ from others with respect to morality.
I think it would be illuminating to hear individuals who think it is too far down the slope to articulate 1) why they feel that way 2) whether the objection goes away if it's for organs instead of food, 3) how they feel about early-term abortion and embryonic stem cells 4) whether it is morally okay to eat a corpse of a person who has died and has given permission to have their corpse eaten.