/sci/ - Science & Math

Because liberals gonna libs.

Im with you OP, food is food. Im not gonna waste time and money on treating food like something it isnt.

>>3529687
they want to treat animals humanely, not food numb nuts.

>>3529687
OP, i'll agree. One condition, you must kill your dog, by hand, then eat him.

k. You do that, and i'll stop requesting you be humane to animals.

>>3529700
Dont have a dog but a pet is not food. I treat my pets like I treat a pet.

pet != food.

some people put value on the pain and suffering of others, even animals.

I do. I dont believe that hunting animals to the point where it has a damaging effect on eco systems is moral, and I dont think exploiting animals purely for profit, while consciously and willingly neglecting them is moral.

I don't however feel that having some animals bred, and killed for our food to be immoral. Some people do.

>>3529694
Then why ban the best method we have of producing eggs just because we arent treating a fucking chicken "humanely"!

If the food was people, would the food still be just food? The fact is, animals can often feel pain and exhibit other properties similar to humans. They are nowhere near us in most of the areas that I believe count, but empathy causes strong emotions and opinions to form.

i think we should kill all humans and feed them to the animals

i like being with my dog more than listening to OP's fat ass

>>3529706
A human is not the same as other species of animals,other species of animals are not bound by ethics or morals.

>>3529720
Thats the problem with you evirmentlast greentards, you prefer animals of other species to the welfare of humans. This kind of people should stay away from politics but alas that is not the case

>>3529703
It is in asia.

Now surrender your pets, and I will eat them for you.

>>3529700
>be muslim
>sacrifice sheep and it eat every now and then
PROBLEM, libs?

>>3529726
in defense of anon, i like my unconditional animal that asks very little of me, and does not cause me much pain and suffering, such as the human race does. Yes I'm a human, but I work at a pet store, and I have to put up with the worst fucking people who think they know how to take care of another living creature after they drove all the way across town 30 minutes before we close because they were sitting at home watching a movie, and then decided...WAIT....LETS GET A TOKAY GECKO. YAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! People are retarded, imho.

>>3529721
Being bound by ethics of morals is not what I was talking about. Both humans and animals can feel pain. People can be empathetic towards the pain of animals. Sometimes animals are raised in such ways that they are constantly uncomfortable and/or in pain. Humans will naturally feel empathy towards these animals. If you could either torture or not torture animals and still yield the exact same food with the exact same amount of work, which route would you choose? (I am not saying that these are the choices in real life)

>>3529741
Fuck off ching chong!

Besides in Asia dogs are farm for eating.

>>3529726
Yeah, we should just do what the indians of yore did. Kill the animal, then eat and use every part of it.

>Whose up for some afghani food later? I heard they're surging in the morning, should be some fresh, lean food.

>>3529721
lrn2 bonobo

bound by?
>hegemony

>>3529744
A pet is different, it is moral to treat a pet with care and respect but food is different. Food production should emphasize quality of the product and quantity nothing more.

>>3529726
>implying you actually care about another human being other than ur self

>>3529755
We do that fuck face, its called canned meat.

ITT: buttmad greentards

>But battery farming is the most cost effective way of producing the eggs needed to sustain us.

No one "needs" eggs or animal meat to sustain them. They would just like to have them because they are a convenient way of getting protein. There are much more "cost effective" and healthy ways of sustaining yourself than by farming animals. Future humans will look back on farming of animals as an extremely primitive and amoral abhorrence of the 21's century, because they will synthesise food artificially.

>>3529764
nope. Evolution has caused us to inherently "care" about our young, mates, and family members for OBVIOUS reasons

>>3529760
Nope. An animal is an animal.

Food is a food.

Either we eat all food or not.

We're omnivores. If you want people to treat each other humanely, then you need them to treat everything humanely.

Making up arbitrary exceptions is what religions do.

>>3529769
this guy knows watsup

>>3529769
Before we are able to do that farming is the only way to sustain our growing population.

>>3529778
pets appeal to emotion. That isnt arbitrary.

>>3529770
>implying anyone cares about you

>>3529769
>mfw I don't give a shit about what humans of the 3545th century will think about me

>>3529784
...god appeals to emotion

>>3529778
Wow you have a very warped logic there libtard. Humans are sapient beings and I treat them as such. Pets are companions and I treat them as such. Food is nourishment and I treat it as such.

>>3529797
except we're arguing about how pets are not the same as animals that are bred and killed for food.

>>3529687
I am vegan because I think that I don't really need it and I can survive without it, that means that their is gonna be less animal cruelty. at the same way if I found my self in the desert or something like it and I found a animal of any kind I am going to eat it but if I can survive as much as I can without killing I think that is giving that other creature the same chance to live as they give you the chance to love too.

hi vegans

where do you keep all of your amino acids?

>>3529806
No, we're arguing about how you're the arbiter of what is food.

I'm either going to kill you and eat you inhumanely or I'm going to kill you humanely and not eat you.

You can't have it both ways.

ITT: religious or rationnal people vs libtards and vegans

>>3529809
sorry english is not my first language

>>3529810
Pills. A lot.

>>3529811
What?!

No we are not shitface.

>>3529811
this makes little sense, and still doesnt mean that saying "god appeals to emotion, like pets" proves anything in your favour.

We don't need eggs to sustain us.
We don't need meat to stay alive.
We just like the way those things taste, and since the Christian bible doesn't say anything about not eating meat, we don't mind killing millions of chicken and injecting cows with fat so we Humans can keep getting Fatter and FATTER.

I personally eat anything that is tasty. I love meat, egg, cheese, fruit, veggies, I love good food.

>>3529830
It's not my fault you're stupid.

You're being arbitrary about what you call a pet. I can't convince you that your designation is nothing but semantics.

It should have been clear several examples before, but I'm pretty sure you're just trolling and you're not finding a good situation where you can troll someone's feelings.

Either we eat the afghanis we kill inhumanely, or we humanely kill animals to eat.

choose 1.

>>3529823
Eh?

We're at the top of the food chain. Anyway you look at it, we're the arbiter of what is food.

If I call you food, do you want me to treat you humanely or not?

fucking food.

>>3529833
>HUUURRRR EATING MEAT IS LIKE RELIGON HURRRRR
Wow it had to be a tripfag, we are obnivores. Meats are an important source of protein, amino-acids and other important vitamins and minerals. I agree that maybe we are eating a bit to much of it but is still part of our diet. It is thanks to meat that we got this big brain of ours.

>>3529844
eating afghans wouldnt be cost effective or sanitary.

No reason to eat everything you kill. Killing happens for more reasons that food.

>>3529833

I agree. Also as I (and most generally well educated science enthusiasts) have a mostly utilitarian moral code, I cannot deny that a quantitative measure of consciousness (currently unattainable but qualitatively estimate-able) amounts to a corresponding increase in respect.

Funny question... Does any amount of cows (say they have a "consciousness measurement" of 5) equal a single human (say 500)?

I'm tempted to say no but when I really think about it, I think yes.

Also status quo meat production is unsustainable and cruel. This is undeniable.

Also in terms of average lifespan, vegetarians>omnivores>vegans

>>3529848
When did I say eating meat is like religion?
When discussing if eating meat is ethical or not, most of the time religion is brought into the debate.

If you don't think that religion and ethics are related, you've obviously haven't taken an Ethics course.

>>3529850
What? They're already being killed, so why not just eat what we kill.

I mean if we're going throw humanity out the window, the least we can do is reap the benefits of the war machine.

I mean, it's not like we need to ship them over here. Just setup a factory and move the dead (or dying) to it's doors. Package the meat and feed the homeless.

It's pretty simple, really. We let alot of food go to waste because of some insane taboo about food.

>>3529848
No. Not eating pets because of emotions is religion:

Its an arbitrary designation by society on something that is no different than any other animal...except:

emotion...

I'm not sure you guys really get what OP's trying to troll.

>>3529872
Nope. "Conciosness" ,w/e that really means, cannot be measured and is definitely not linear. 1 human life is more important that an infinite number of lives of cows.

>>3529883
>why not eat what we kill
it isnt practical, simply.

>>3529873
Ethics is just religious bullshit without a sky god and strange rituals.

>>3529894
Philosophy?
No really I don't understand what you're trying to say...
Ethics =/= religion,
although both are related to each other.

>>3529884

I didn't spell it wrong you nerd (not that it detracts from your argument).

I don't quite get the inherent anthropocentricism in people these days.

A human being is not a concrete thing or state. As we evolved from less conscious organisms ourselves, I see no measure to distinguish between our own species and other lifeforms.

The cow/human equivialancy question was too obvious for your type. How bout this:
How many neanderthals=a modern homo sapien
How many humans with Down Syndrome= a human with genius level intellect
How many humans in vegetative state=fully conscious gorillas

etc. etc.

You see, life is a lot more complicated and graded (in a linear manner if I may say so) than seems immediately obvious to those unwilling to ponder.

>>3529911
Ok, so explain why we can't eat pets and we can eat animals?

>>3529922

edit:

"I see no measure to distinguish between our own species and other lifeforms except consciousness (for ethical questions)"

>>3529922
>You see, life is a lot more complicated and graded (in a linear manner if I may say so)
>complicated
>linear
You went full retard there, bud.

Of course its not quite ethical to eat a chimp or a retard but this is not the same as eating a fucking cow. But I would still fucking eat it if I got no choice.

>>3529924
The same way a tribe wont eat his tribesmen but would eat an enemy tribe. We as social animals tend to form links with beings we live with.

>>3529848
>Meats are an important source of protein, amino-acids and other important vitamins and minerals.

>implying you can't get those things elsewhere

>>3529924
First of all, I never said you couldn't eat your pet.
As long as there's no law against that I ain't going to argue with you if you want to do that.

Now then, In our society we have developed a special relationship with cats and dogs over a long period of time.
Most people wouldn't say that cats and dogs are our equals though, no one has ever been put to death for killing someone else's pet dog.

So the reason we can eat cows but not dogs is mostly compassion and pity for them.

Therefore have fun eating your pet dog. I wouldn't be able to kill my pet for I have an emotional attachment to it.

>>3529930
So how do we determine if someone is conscious? If we have AI that becomes conscious, do they suddenly get civil rights?

If a chimp knows how to produce sign language, is that enough?

When your dog greets you and fetchs your shoes, is this conscious action?

Seems rediculous.

Either we eat everything as food, inhumanely or we treat all animals humanely.

>>3529950
Yeah by using shit ton of pills. Are you suggesting that we should ingest pills that taste like shit because its EVIL to kill the poor animals. Fuck off you pussified emasculated libtard.

>>3529941

You are confusing the use of two separate adjectives for two separate concepts.

Restating your initial position is unnecessary.

You suggested that no amount of cows will ever equal a single human life.

This is silly, considering both humans and cows are evolving species, who at some point in time shared a common ancestor (at which point the question becomes invalid). What then, is the measure with which we use to guide us in difficult ethical decisions regarding the survival of some life vs. the survival of some other life?

I assert consciousness (though we lack a quantitative measurement at the present moment) and you seem to be asserting taste.

>>3529964
The world is not black and white, something tells me you are still young and dont have that much experience of the world.

>>3529971
At that point in time that common ancestor was not a cow or a human and even if it was our ancestor it does not make it a human. By that same logic we can say that eating vegetables is unethical because we shared a common ancestor.

>>3529968
>Yeah by using shit ton of pills.

nope.jpg

Do you even know anything about nutrition or are you just spouting nonsense?

>>3529982
I aprently know more than you because I eat what my gave my ancestor their brains.

>>3529964

As I mentioned, we lack a quantitative measure at the present time. This may or may not change in the future. For now, qualitative tests could be used for relatively meaningful estimates (exg, the mirror test, IQ tests for humans, tool usage, problem solving skills, sensory capabilities).

I would assert that AI would certainly be entitled to civil rights in human society if its level of consciousness was relatively equal to ours. That's highly unlikely though. The dasein of a human (or any biological organism) is probably impossible to replicate in an artificial circumstance.

Because feelings matter more then facts.

>>3529975
It's probably the same delusion you have about your place in this world.

I appologize. I thought you claimed to have a solution to ethical treatment of other entities in this thing we call reality.

I guess your 'conciousness' delineation is as meaningless as saying pets arn't food.

>>3529988
What did your ancestors know about human biology?
They ate what they could, not what would benefit them most.

Some people have something called empathy, and don't feel that an animal bred to the slaughter should be put in conditions that make Nazi death camps look favourable. Frankly I don't care either way, but I am annoyed at the idiots that pretend that animals can't feel pain, or believe they they are magically in another tier of existence, as if their life has any more worth or significance that that of the cow they ate for dinner.

>>3529980

I've concluded by your inability to comprehend my arguments that I am either very bad at getting my point across or you are very bad at understanding them. Probably a bit of both.

It is therefore futile to continue arguing. I encourage you to do private research in your own time and read arguments for and against the consumption of animals by as many sources as you can.

You may be surprised.

My final point is that no species is inherently more entitled to life than any other on an organism for organism basis unless we are in a position to compare their consciousness.

You may make your final point, and I will think about it.

>>3530011
So in conclusion we should treat all living beings the same way we treat humans. Oh no what about that disease Timmy have, well thats to bad we cant kill a fellow living being now can we. Maybe if we talk to it we can make it go away.

>>3530027

Normally you don't reply to a final argument, but please reiterate your point for me. I'm quite lost. Who is Timmy? A hypothetical person afflicted with a disease? I'm confused.

>>3529700
Not OP but I just killed my dog. Not planning to eat him though since I have no space in the freezer, and I'm not throwing out good meat for dog.

>>3530027

He means we should only eat our enemy's pets.

>>3530067
but did you kill him humanely?

>>3530087
Of course I kill him the same way I would kill a human.

>>3529720
Kill all Humans eh???????

I'm in!

>>3529687
ITT: OP gets mad he can't troll how he wanna troll.

>ya, thats how we troll

>>3529687
OP, you know that ecological farming produces better quality food?

In my opinion, even that is a good enough argument.

Factory farmed animals have to stuffed full of antibiotics for them not to die prematurely due to bad living conditions. Which in turn means we get a shitload of drug resistant bacteria through our food.
So basically cheaper meat and eggs means more expensive health care as we have to use and develop new antibiotics to combat resistant strains.

TL;DR Little Billy is going to die a slow and horrible death from MRSA because you want cheap egg and bacon.

>>3530125
It isn't as efficient though.

>>3530130
Because we don't investigate enough, also, people don't need to consume 4000 kcal/day like many people do in certain countries to live

>>3530130

>citation needed

Secondly, efficient in what manner?
Thirdly, what is to blame for this asserted inefficiency?

>>3530144

I'm not sure what you're getting at. There is no reason for a corporation like Monsanto to treat their animals properly. It isn't cost-effective.

>>3530158
Could you clarify your understanding of the "cost-effective" concept, and tell us why it's so important, more than the quality and the sustainability of the production?

>>3530165

It's cheaper to house animals in Worse-Than-Nazi conditions than it is to treat them properly. This means bigger profits for the company. What about this isn't easy to understand?

>>3530165
looks good on the balance sheets. Is easy to tabulate.

>>3530174
I accept the cheaper part, I want you to explain why it's better.
Read
>>3530165
Again please

>>3530179

Oh, I'm aware that its worse for the population. But that doesn't matter. The food corporations do what is more profitable.