From: nick@skate.cs.washington.edu (Nicholas Kushmerick)
Subject: Re: A rat is a pig-headed moron is a ...
Organization: University of Washington Computer Science
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 04:02:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan13.015848.357@odin.corp.sgi.com>, zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide) writes:
|> Nicholas Kushmerick whines:
|> >(1) You are lying when you tell me you believe plans are conscious.
|> I'm not so sure, 

Let me get this straight -- you believe plants to be conscious in something
that approaches the level of animals? 

|> and to be truthful, I wouldn't care if they were.

You clearly do care, since your argument against AR is based on it mattering.

|> >(2) Even if you did believe that plans are conscious, it wouldn't matter. 
|> >maybe the name of the game should be "Eliminate All Suffering", but it
|> >isn't.  The name of the animal rights game is "Reduce Suffering."  So you
|> >not only need to convince me that plans are conscious, but that they are
|> >MORE conscious than animals (and therefore capable of suffering more.)
|> 
|> Why does it matter if plants are more or less conscious than animals? They
|> turn towards the sun, they grow, they can close vulnerable parts when they 
|> sense danger....are *you* any wiser than me when you draw the line of
|> suffering on one side of the Venus Flytrap and not the other? Do you have
|> the omniscience to say "well, it's not *really* aware of its surroundings and
|> therefore its suffering is acceptable..."?  What does it matter if they are more
|> conscious than animals? How about just as conscious, or even slightly less. 
|> You remind me of those who said that negroes don't feel pain the way others
|> do, so whipping them is not really cruel... 

I think you misread me.  Let me try again.  Are plants conscious?  Let's take
the conservative approach and say "I don't know."  Are they more or less
conscious than animals?  Well this seems like a hard question too, but it sures
seems easier that the first.  I am quite certain that plants are less conscious
than animals.  So if the goal is to reduce suffering then we should inflict it
plants rather than animals.

So that's the argument.  You also seem to be against my claiming that the goal
is to reduce suffering rather than to eliminate it.  Human beings are the most
adaptable organisms on earth, but even we have limits, and it seems clear to me
that we simply can not avoid causing suffering to some other organisms, not
matterr how hard to try.  So let me restate my position: It would be nice to
eliminate all suffering, but we can't, so let's do the next best thing --
minimize it.  I frankly can't see how this could upset you so much.

|> rationalize 
|> it away by saying "well, a cow's not capable of suffering like the 
|> rest of us"

The point is, we can look at a soybean plant and look a cow and make a
decision: which is likely to suffer more if I kill it?  Are you saying this is
a hard question to answer, or that it is the wrong question to ask, or
something else? 

I think that the word "rationalize" points out your lie.  My claim that plants
are less conscious than animals is self-evident to anyone who examines it in
good faith, while your claim needs a rationalization to back it up.

-- Nick
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals