= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Ruairi comments on Arguments Against Speciesism - 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 (474)
I feel like you're saying this:
"There are a great many sentient organisms, so we should discriminate against some of them"
Is this what you're saying?
EDIT: Sorry, I don't mean that bacteria or viruses are sentient. Still, my original question stands.
All I am saying is that one has to make an arbitrary care/don't care boundary somewhere. and "human/non-human" is a rather common and easily determined Schelling point in most cases. It fails in some, like the intelligent pig example from the OP, but then every boundary fails on some example.
Where does sentience fail as a boundary?
if sentience isn't a boolean condition.