From: jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins)
Subject: Re: Game Management Policies
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 22:24:59 GMT

Mary Otto writes:
>>
>Russell, to ascribe a personality to an animal would require that
>I consider an animal to have the mental characteristics and emotional
>characteristics of a human being.  Nothing in my experiences with
>a great number of animals has ever led me to believe that they
>have those types of characteristics.  It is my belief that because
>
>Russell, dogs don't have contemplations and emotions.  Humans wrongly
>project their own emotional and philosophical interpretations of the actions
>of dogs and label them as the thoughts and feelings of dogs.  The same
>for other animals.


What?  Sure, dogs have "contemplations and emotions."  And I have a friend
that had a pet deer that SLEPT in bed with the children of the family.
Research shows that mammals dream.  I think you're giving Russell a fairly raw
deal because I don't think he has ever stated that animal cognition is the same
as human cognition.  Russell's point is that there is SOMETHING going on in the
head of mammals that humans should try to value.  Mr. Lawrence then goes on
to argue, I guess, that if you would only be as open and sensitive to this
idea as he is you would learn as he did not to kill and eat these thinking 
creatures.  I don't agree with you that Mr. Lawrence anthropomorphizes animal
cognition and emotion.  He simply views it differently than you do.


>But reuniting with the previously argued points, why does it matter
>to humans if an animal suffers?  Humans project their own emotions
>about the suffering onto the animal because it is an instinctive

If I'm to understand correctly what you state in your posting, you have a
"true understanding" of what nature is all about.  Your insight is that it
(your true understanding) tells you that it does not matter if an
animal suffers.  Well, I agree that it doesn't matter if a fawn suffers at
the paws of a wolf--that is the way of nature.  But you're extending things
to tell us that it really doesn't matter that humans are capable of using
their intelligence to survey the ways of nature and ascertain their place in
nature.  If we as humans do not comprehend that our intelligence places us
(somewhat tragically) both within and removed from nature then it wouldn't
matter to you if farm animals are tortured before they are slaughtered, it
doesn't matter if your son has a cow in your basement that he tortures in the
evening after school, or if you buy goldfish and never bother to replenish
their water.  If you are comfortable with the implications of announcing as a
premise that humans shouldn't mind if animals suffer then you have a distinct
and unique way of viewing animals (and viewing their capacity to suffer) from
other humans through the ages to the present.  I believe that animals should
not suffer--whether we eat them or not.

>Russell, I sense from your postings that you are disenfranchised from
>your humanity, from the nature of yourself as a human animal.  You
>deny you canines and incisors.  You deny your human ancestry of hunters
>and omnivores.  Are you seeking companionship in animals to fill the
>void, that you claim such comradeship with them?  Are you so isolated
>that you seek animals, which, having no emotions, can be ascribed
>emotions that fulfill your needs?  Your postings are full of such rage
>and such misunderstandings of the nature of humans and other animals.
>I am answering your sixth post of the day, and I haven't finished
>reading them since I stopped to answer this one;  how much time are you
>spending locked away with the modem and not interacting with the
>non-electronic environment?  I went for a lovely walk at lunch and
>saw some toads and heard some crickets and watched some bird and felt
>the wind blow around me and life was good.  Then I came back to the
>office and helped some friends out and read some news and answered your
>post.  Life needs balance.  I hope you find both balance and harmony
>in the world.
>Mary Otto


Give Mr. Lawrence a break.  He's healthy and an outdoorsman who likes to
hike, winter-camp and rock climb.  He's also a damn good writer.  He has a
perspective on nature that is different from yours.  His only one failing as
he participates in this forum (and we all have many) is his insistence that
his way is the way.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals