From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Should humans assign "status"?
Organization: WP Group
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 03:47:54 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Would you kill and eat a human?   Or would you refrain from doing
rl> so because of your respect for the human's thoughts and feelings?

In article <yhwzswb@rpi.edu>, John S. Van Etten:
jve> I really thought you understood that we are discussing non-humans.
jve> Even though this is a tangential issue, let me ask you this.  If a
jve> plane crashed in Alaska and the only people on board were you, Saddam
jve> Hussein, and the Harlem Boys Choir, and you had a pistol, would you
jve> shoot our friend from Iraq and eat him...

Not if there were plant foods available.

jve> I will kill any of them for food.

rl> Does a cow care if you kill it?  [yes]
rl> Does a cabbage care if you kill it?  [probably not]

jve> Russell, you normally have a very good command of the English
jve> language, but you've managed to really confuse me here.  The rhetorcal
jve> device you used, that of including answers to questions in editorial
jve> brackets, is only supposed to be used for what are "obvious" and
jve> "correct" answers.  A cow will not care in the slightest if I kill it.
jve> It will be dead at that point.  Nor will a cabbage, as it will be
jve> dead, too.

As vice-president of a major chain of supermarkets, one of my 
uncles visited a slaughter house many years ago and reported that 
some of the cows appeared to know what was going on, and were 
behaving frantically.  Do you think those cows had sufficient
mental prowess to understand that something unpleasant was about
to befall them?   Do cabbages experience similar fears?

jve> The only thing either of these will care about is whether or not
jve> I *try* to kill it.  And as we both know, that's not nearly the same
jve> thing and causes your arguments below to fall apart.

Please explain.

rl> If the cow objects strenously to your actions while the cabbage 
rl> couldn't care less, then the impact that your actions have 
rl> on each of them would be vastly different regardless of your
rl> mental feat in reducing both "cow" and "cabbage" to the level of 
rl> something that you can stuff in your face, ie food.  

jve> Russell, you truly missed something here, and you truly need to 
jve> think a little more about this issue.  *Both* beings will do 
jve> everything they can to avoid death.  If someone drags a cow out 
jve> onto a slaughterhouse floor and slits its throat in an effort to 
jve> "get the blood out of the meat," this cow is not going to enjoy 
jve> the experience and will try to get away and survive.  Likewise, 
jve> if someone pulls a plant out and throws it on the ground to die, 
jve> it will send out roots like mad because it, too, would prefer to 
jve> be alive.  

Carrot preferences?    If I cut my finger, and new skin cells
begin to form (unbeknownst to the mind of Russell Lawrence), would 
this lead us to conclude that the "mind" of my finger or the "mind" 
of my skin is seeking health?

jve> I'm afraid I can't let you get away with your "naive" little game 
jve> of trying to say that because the carrot cannot perceive the 
jve> immediate threat of being sliced up, it therefore, in Russell 
jve> Lawrence's and Peter Singer's minds, doesn't prefer to remain 
jve> alive.  No, I'm sorry, but that isn't the right answer, so you get 
jve> no prize.  :-) 

Which of us is more naive?   The man who asserts that non-human
animals have intentions and feelings and are conscious of their 
surroundings?  Or the man who asserts that carrots have a set
of preferences about life and death?

jve> ... The fact that you and other AR folks can better relate to animals 
jve> because they more closely resemble yourselves, and you are more 
jve> willing to kill plants because they aren't aware that you're 
jve> going to do so (the Big Brown Eyes Syndrome), strikes me as 
jve> arbitrary in the extreme.  

Uh huh.  Let me ask you a question about this "Big Brown Eyes 
Syndrome".  If you were a veterinary surgeon, would you give
anesthesia to all your sentient patients?  Or, would you only
administer it to those individuals who have "Big Brown Eyes" that
remind you of "Bambi"?

>...
rl> To be concerned about the thoughts and feelings of other beings is 
rl> hardly an arbitrary consideration.

jve> It is most assuredly an arbitrary criterion for deciding 
jve> which ones are OK to kill.  Please try to remember that we're not 
jve> talking about treatment here.  No-one is poking anything in the 
jve> eye with an icepick (to borrow one of your imaginative examples).  

I'm somewhat confused about your assumption that killing isn't a 
form of treatment?  Do all deer die instantly?  How many suffer in
agony before death or recovery?

jve> In my opinion, sentience and sapience are valid (and there are many
jve> others, of course) criterion on which to base our "treatment" of any
jve> being.  

rl> Name some others.

ry> Rich Young already did this, I won't bore you with any more.

Would a senseless/mindless entity be able to appreciate his criteria?

jve> It will satisfy me if you can simply explain to us why sentience 
jve> and sapience are supposedly the only relevant criteria.  

Frankly, I can't imagine how there could be any criteria at all
without sapience and sentience.

jve> As I've said so many times in the past, your standard "cuz Peter 
jve> Singer sez so" line doesn't work on me.  I'm an atheist, 
jve> remember?  

As an atheist, perhaps you could help me understand your views
about the "arbitrariness" of sentience and sentience if you would
please explain the difference between:

   -- the belief that the universe exists, but is mindless-in-itself 
      [many atheists have this view]

   -- the belief that the universe, not only exists, but thinks 
      and feels. [many religionists have this view]

If it could be established that the universe has a mind of its own,
would you henceforth be inclined to consider yourself as a deist
or theist, rather than an atheist?

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals