Hacker News Reader

Comment by marknutter | Hacker News Reader

I'm fairly certain spiders are not concerned about the suffering of the butterflies they consume..

Are you seriously comparing animals killing and eating other animals for food with what we do to animals and birds in slaughterhouses? Have you watched videos of slaughterhouses? Have you seen how fur is plucked off rabbits for angora, and feathers off birds for down jackets? In almost all cases, the skin also comes off and they are not even killed after the act but mercilessly left to die on their own. Almost everyone, even if they choose to ignore it, acknowledges the cruelty in the meat and farming industry.

Have you watched videos of spiders eating their prey? It's more horrific than what we do in most cases. They paralyze them, wrap them up, let them sit there to contemplate their demise, and then suck the blood out of them while they're incapacitated and conscious. Spiders are but one example of the horrific predator/prey dynamic in nature.

And to be clear, I'm just as horrified by our treatment of animals as you are but I've learned to make my peace with it. I'm just hoping that lab-grown meat becomes a viable alternative some day and we don't have to grow animals for food.

Just reiterate what you just said and see how it sounds. If everybody looked at atrocities and tries to "make their peace" with them, you can imagine how the world will turn out. I feel at this point you are just trying to defend your previous points, some of which are on very shaky ground.

>If everybody looked at atrocities and tries to "make their peace" with them, you can imagine how the world will turn out.

Which brings us back to the issue of the spider and the butterfly. Do you just make your peace that the butterfly will be tortured to death, or do you intervene, thus indirectly causing the spider to die a torturous death of starvation?

The point is we can have everything we currently have without resorting to that torture (killing of cows and pigs in slaughterhouses, de-beaking of chickens). Thats what I am trying to eliminate or abate. Animals preying on other animals is natural, and also something they cannot avoid.

I figure these chickens wouldn't be alive if it weren't for us, and if asked, would they choose not to have ever existed in favor of existing and meeting a horrific demise?

Another thing to consider - if we genetically engineered chickens that couldn't feel pain, would it be unethical to debeak them?

Let me get this straight. Are you saying that animal cruelty is a non-issue? Or that its just a matter of perspective? Animal farming to me is reason enough for people to take up animal welfare as a cause. I could also add myriad other examples - trophy hunting, dog fighting, pulling out tusks out of elephants while they are alive.

No, I'm just giving you my justifications for ignoring the issue.

At no point did I want or expect that. I dont expect my causes to be taken up by anybody else. I can also give justifications for ignoring issues that are important to you or anybody else. Doesn't really serve any purpose.

You intervene. Aware creatures eating each other is just a hack the universe needed (apparently) to get energy flowing into more and more complex, intelligent organisms. We can and will, given time and non-self-destruction, figure out a way to get all our energy from non-living sources (given some definition of the word living). With that kind of power, perhaps we could end warfare in general in our sphere of influence.

Although it is undeniable that there is a vast beauty to the living systems on Earth, that doesn't mean there couldn't be something more beautiful and alive... without so much... digestion.

Which shows the same amount of concern that animals give each other when they kill/eat/toy with them.

Maybe humans should do better because we can, but if I am going to go about stopping other humans from committing horrible treatment, why should I then 'make peace' with how other animals behave? But to make this problem worse, look at how some animals mate. If you were to only allow peaceful instances, the species would be extinct in three generations. But maybe that is the good thing to do, because the duty is to the individual and not the species. Perhaps the humane thing to do with the spider is to not kill it, but to stop reproduction so there are no more spiders killing butterflies.

Morality sure is weird.

Spiders don't have the luxury to be.

Spiders lack moral agency.

They do (lack moral agency), but you and I don't (at least we think we don't, but that is a different issue to save for elsewhere). So, while the spider may not be morally wrong for torturing its prey, I am morally wrong for allowing the spider to torture its prey when I am in a position to stop the spider.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com