Animal Cruelty - Why should we care?

[Frozenwolf150]

I think the cultural relativism argument is bunk. It is incoherent to argue that "it's a cultural thing" therefore it's okay. When does one cultural norm change to another cultural norm? Is slavery okay when a culture permits it? Should foot-binding and FGM be accepted in some cultures because, hey, it's culture, man!? What it someone within the culture disagrees with a cultural practice?

That hadn't occurred to me, though you're right, people were essentially using that argument in the Quattro case, when Paterson residents were saying that "outsiders" had no right to step in and tell them how to do things. Excuse me, but the boys who tried to save Quattro certainly thought that animal cruelty is wrong.

I agree with a weak form of this. It is hard to disagree that historical trends favour greater rights for more people and other animals. I also think that people's attitudes have changed, and yes, improved from what they were in the Middle Ages.

It is, however, difficult to agree with the suggestions that this will inevitably continue or that there is some "moral arc of the universe" (Sorry RandFan, that's just "woo") which tends towards justice. In fact, "justice" can often be in opposition to consequentialist ethics and it is not clear that justice is favoured above outcomes by the majority of people.

I can't help but be somewhat pessimistic. On one hand, there was a time in history when cats were revered and worshiped. They were so valued for their ability to control pests that people believed them to be a gift from the gods. Yet later on in history, they came to be associated with witches and the devil, and were burned alongside suspected humans. That sure seems like a reversal to me.

 

[angrysoba]

I cannot agree with you. Mortality rate is much, much lower. The ability to mitigate suffering is much, much better. Social justice is better. We are far closer to the Veil of Ignorance thought experiment than ever before. It's not simply familiarity, I like indoor plumbing, anti-biotics, the ability to travel accross the united states in hours. There was a time, not that long ago, it took months and people died along the way. There was a time when surgery was performed without anesthetic. Parents lived in fear of their children contracting polio, mumps or many other diseases that regularly took the lives of children. Hell, it was not uncommon for children to die from diseases that are largely eradicated today. Suffering was much, much higher. Well being was much, much lower.

I think it is just too easy to take all of our modern conveniences and technology for granted. We honestly don't realize just how good we have it.

Familiarity has little to do with it. I don't like suffering. I like modern medicine. I contracted cellulitis and was in the hospital for more than a week. It was hell. My prognosis was near septic. My doctor ordered a pick line. I had antibiotics delivered straight to my heart to be pumped throughout my body. In the past there was a good chance I just would have died. It's a fact that people died all of the time from diseases that are today treatable.

I think you far too easily hand wave away all of these seemingly miraculous procedures and treatments and you do not understand just how good your life is now compared to what it might have been had there been no antibiotics, no modern medicine, no advanced diagnostic technology.

Never mind diseases and illness as a result of iodine deficiency, thiamin deficiency, vitamin C deficiency (real problems in times past) etc, etc.. These are not tabulated in most people's balance sheets. Hell, most people have no idea how well they have it.

You are afforded the luxury to shrug your shoulders in ignorance and say "meh".

I think we're talking at cross-purposes. Either way, I'm not sure how you justify your assertion that I'm speaking in ignorance and don't know how good things are. I think it's a rather obnoxious insinuation and ironically you are ignorant about what I know.

 

[RandFan]

I think we're talking at cross-purposes. Either way, I'm not sure how you justify your assertion that I'm speaking in ignorance and don't know how good things are. I think it's a rather obnoxious insinuation and ironically you are ignorant about what I know.

This does not address the premises made. We can objectively state that things like literacy, mortality rate, health, education, etc., are better. I provided empirical data that you have not addressed. The long term trends of social and moral progress in modern liberal democracies is clear. Many people are in fact ignorant of the trend and/or the trend for granted. If you understand and accept that fact then I honestly have no idea why you would object to my proposition.

 

[RandFan]

Statistical outliers do not a rule make. Also, there are social and moral costs that come with changing technology and policies. I don't claim that things are simply and only getting better. I don't claim that all of the outcomes of today are always better than all of the outcomes of yesterday. Modern technology and social interaction carry with them new and different burdens.

Here's an example, Brazil's Pirahã Tribe are some of the last indigenous people's living without modern conveniences. They have low rates of depression and are high in both health and well-being. However, this fact isn't inspiring many people to leave modern societies and live off of the grid. I concede that it is a complex problem. However, the the Pirahã have high infant mortality rates. They do suffer the pain of losing children frequently. They have coping mechanisms but most people would not want to live the life of the Pirah.

 

[angrysoba]

This does not address the premises made. We can objectively state that things like literacy, mortality rate, health, education, etc., are better. I provided empirical data that you have not addressed. The long term trends of social and moral progress in modern liberal democracies is clear. Many people are in fact ignorant of the trend and/or the trend for granted. If you understand and accept that fact then I honestly have no idea why you would object to my proposition.

What's your proposition?

 

[angrysoba]

Statistical outliers do not a rule make. Also, there are social and moral costs that come with changing technology and policies. I don't claim that things are simply and only getting better. I don't claim that all of the outcomes of today are always better than all of the outcomes of yesterday. Modern technology and social interaction carry with them new and different burdens.

Here's an example, Brazil's Pirahã Tribe are some of the last indigenous people's living without modern conveniences. They have low rates of depression and are high in both health and well-being. However, this fact isn't inspiring many people to leave modern societies and live off of the grid. I concede that it is a complex problem. However, the the Pirahã have high infant mortality rates. They do suffer the pain of losing children frequently. They have coping mechanisms but most people would not want to live the life of the Pirah.

How many Pirahã want to live like the "crooked headed ones"?

 

[RandFan]

What's your proposition?

That in the long term suffering decreases and well-being increases in modern liberal democracies.

How many Pirahã want to live like the "crooked headed ones"?

Google provides no help for "crooked headed ones". I was curious and skimmed my Don't Sleep There are Snakes but didn't find a reference. The Pirahã call themselves Hi'aiti'ihi, The Straight Ones. I'm not sure they call anyone "crooked headed ones" but I could be wrong. Do you have a link or page number?

In any event, there are in fact Pirahã that immigrate to modern societies.

 

[angrysoba]

That in the long term suffering decreases and well-being increases in modern liberal democracies.

Well I haven't disputed that things have improved. In fact, I have explicitly stated that they have. As for modern liberal democracies, many people would argue that modern liberal democracies are simply better than say totalitarian states or lawless states simply because they are modern liberal democracies. Myself included.

You will perhaps also have noticed that even in non-modern liberal democracies that life has got much better for people going by most statistical metrics such as literacy, longevity, infant mortality etc...

But I am not disputing that things have got better in those terms, so to call me ignorant is, I think, insulting. I also don't appreciate your moralizing tone about how I don't appreciate how good things are for me. It suggests you think I am ungrateful.

Google provides no help for "crooked headed ones". I was curious and skimmed my Don't Sleep There are Snakes but didn't find a reference. The Pirahã call themselves Hi'aiti'ihi, The Straight Ones. I'm not sure they call anyone "crooked headed ones" but I could be wrong. Do you have a link or page number?

In any event, there are in fact Pirahã that immigrate to modern societies.

Page 304 of

Language: The Cultural Tool

But the Pirahãs have begun to ask me each time I visit why they are so few (they say "so small") and why there are so many "crooked people" in the world (the Pirahãs view all non-Pirahã people as "crooked" that is bent and not working properly).

I have not read Don't Sleep There Are Snakes, but apparently one of the chapter titles is "Crooked Heads and Straight Heads" (Chapter 16), so your skimming was presumably quite perfunctory.

But my point, in response to your question of "Where would you rather live?" was that simply asking a person if they would rather live in the time and place that they do now or some other time and place is not a good thought experiment as I believe most people are biased in favour of where and when they live. Most people. And some people, while they may choose to live elsewhere, might not do so just because some place is a modern liberal democracy with all the comforts that we enjoy today.

I think that Fukuyama also made this point, unintentionally at first, when explaining that, say, Denmark is an ideal country from a modern liberal democracy perspective and which is "objectively" (if we used statistical measurements of corruption and functioning legal systems etc...) better than Italy. And yet asked where would he prefer to live he says "Italy".

I bet there are many Americans who consider their country objectively better than most of the social democratic European countries and would never dream of living in such places. Many other people, even posters here, have moved country, but they have gone to countries which - from a modern liberal democratic perspective - are objectively worse than where they came from.

On the subject of the Pirahãs, Everett illustrates my point about people being biased in favour of where they live by saying:

When I am alone among the Pirahãs, or I am just with my own family with them, I become nearly bored to death at times. I do my research, eat my fish, walk around, talk a bit, and hit my hammock early. There is no one to discuss my culture with. No fancy restaurants. No wine. Just water, fish, manoic meal, popcorn, coffee, canned meat and a bit of exercise.

On my loneliest days I watch the Pirahãs fish, play tag, make arrows, nurse babies, tickle each other, and in all of their activities I wonder how they can tolerate the sheer monotony of doing the same thing over and over and over again, day in and day out, until they die.

By the same token, when they interrogate me about my life in the US, they find it stupefyingly uninteresting and wholly devoid of life. How can there be pleasure where people eat only bland food that someone else gets for them?

p.323

 

[RandFan]

But I am not disputing that things have got better in those terms,

???

If they have gotten better then why all of the handwaving?

was that simply asking a person if they would rather live in the time and place that they do now or some other time and place is not a good thought experiment

People don't choose to live among the Piriaha.

If people equally chose to live the Piraha live as those those that don't you would have a point. They don't.

 

[angrysoba]

???

If they have gotten better then why all of the handwaving?

People don't choose to live among the Piriaha.

If people equally chose to live the Piraha live as those those that don't you would have a point. They don't.

I have not been handwaving.

I have already explained that it is your thought experiment I object to.

People don't choose to permanently live among the Pirahã because it would be too difficult to adapt to that type of life. But according to Everett they are happier than us.

 

[RandFan]

People don't choose to permanently live among the Pirahã because it would be too difficult to adapt to that type of life.

That's an ad hoc rationalization. Oddly enough some Pirah choose to live in modern society. It's not too easy a thing to do.

But according to Everett they are happier than us.

I've already addressed this. It's not that simple. Everett has adapted to that type of life yet he does not simply choose to live the life of a the Pirah. That's why I provided the example in the first place.

 

[angrysoba]

That's an ad hoc rationalization. Oddly enough some Pirah choose to live in modern society. It's not too easy a thing to do.

I've already addressed this. It's not that simple. Everett has adapted to that type of life yet he does not simply choose to live the life of a the Pirah. That's why I provided the example in the first place.

Well, as you put more stock in the opinions of Pirahã who leave the tribe rather than those who stay, could you give me some numbers of how many leave. Is it a majority?

 

[RandFan]

Well I haven't disputed that things have improved. In fact, I have explicitly stated that they have. As for modern liberal democracies, many people would argue that modern liberal democracies are simply better than say totalitarian states or lawless states simply because they are modern liberal democracies. Myself included.

You will perhaps also have noticed that even in non-modern liberal democracies that life has got much better for people going by most statistical metrics such as literacy, longevity, infant mortality etc...

But I am not disputing that things have got better in those terms, so to call me ignorant is, I think, insulting. I also don't appreciate your moralizing tone about how I don't appreciate how good things are for me. It suggests you think I am ungrateful.

This is still ringing in my ears so, I'm going to end my involvement in this thread agreeing with your contribution here and conceding that my suggestion that you are ignorant is insulting and that my moralizing tone is uncalled for. I will apologize. I'm sorry.

 

[Frozenwolf150]

This begs the question though of whether modern liberal democracies have improved animal welfare and animal rights, since that's the topic of the thread. I suppose they have in some ways, but with industrialization comes industrial farming practices, including the inhumane factory farms we've already discussed at length. One could argue that this is a consequence of technological advancement, and it would be better for the livestock animals if we went back to more traditional methods. Mind you, normally I put a lot of faith in technology to improve the state of the world and the standard of living for human beings.

How can technology help improve the quality of life for the animals in our care as well? How can liberal democracy do the same?

 

[Meed]

This begs the question though of whether modern liberal democracies have improved animal welfare and animal rights, since that's the topic of the thread.

There might be more animal rights/welfare laws now (although they are still extremely meager) than there were in the past. Foie gras is now banned in many European countries, and I believe also in California. At the same time there is more animal cruelty and abuse now than at any other time in history.

I suppose they have in some ways, but with industrialization comes industrial farming practices, including the inhumane factory farms we've already discussed at length. One could argue that this is a consequence of technological advancement, and it would be better for the livestock animals if we went back to more traditional methods. Mind you, normally I put a lot of faith in technology to improve the state of the world and the standard of living for human beings.

There is no way they could meet current demands without industrial farming. And traditional farming can still be quite cruel. That said, I would still view a move from a greater "evil" to a lesser "evil" as a good thing.

How can technology help improve the quality of life for the animals in our care as well? How can liberal democracy do the same?

I don't see how technology can do this. But people in a liberal democracy can do it by consumer choices, advocacy and influencing policy.

 

[RandFan]

How can technology help improve the quality of life for the animals in our care as well? How can liberal democracy do the same?

I don't see how technology can do this.

The production of lab grown meet is a reality. That humans will at some point in the future adopt it is something I have little doubt about. It's a matter of quality, variety and changing attitudes.

 

[Meed]

Ah, yes. Fingers crossed that the cost/efficiency on that stuff becomes low enough to out-compete animal farming.

 

[angrysoba]

This is still ringing in my ears so, I'm going to end my involvement in this thread agreeing with your contribution here and conceding that my suggestion that you are ignorant is insulting and that my moralizing tone is uncalled for. I will apologize. I'm sorry.

RandFan, I appreciate that, and in turn I want to say that I enjoy reading your posts and find them informative. I was a little taken aback by the swipes as I consider them uncharacteristic for you. As it happens, I think we in agreement on almost all the essentials and our disagreement is on minor details.

I also think your point about lab-grown meat is an important area where technology can help with the treatment of animals.

 

[RandFan]

RandFan, I appreciate that, and in turn I want to say that I enjoy reading your posts and find them informative. I was a little taken aback by the swipes as I consider them uncharacteristic for you. As it happens, I think we in agreement on almost all the essentials and our disagreement is on minor details.

I also think your point about lab-grown meat is an important area where technology can help with the treatment of animals.

Thank you. I appreciate your saying so. I get a chip on my shoulder at times and it tends to blind me to reality. My sig file about ego is mostly about and for me.