= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lukas_Gloor comments on Arguments Against Speciesism - LessWrong
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)
Does it have to be the case that "the properties that X possesses" is the only relevant input? It seems to me that the properties possessed by the would-be torturer or killer are also relevant.
For instance, if I came across a kid torturing a mouse (even a fly) I would be horrified, but I would respond differently to a cat torturing a mouse (or a fly).
What if it is done by a baby or a kid with mental impairments so she cannot follow moral/social norms? I see no reason to treat the situation differently in such a case. (Except that one might want to talk to the parents of the kid in order to have them consider a psychological check-up for their child.)
Differently from a normal kid, or differently from a cat? (I share Morendil's moral intuitions regarding his example.)
From the cat. I would in fact press a magic button that turns all carnivores into vegans. The cat (or the kid) doesn't know what it is doing and cannot be meaningfully blamed, but I still consider this to be a harmful action and I would want to prevent it. Who commits the act makes no difference to me (or only for indirect reasons).