436
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
436 points (94.1% liked)
News
23311 readers
3626 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
there is no proof any nonhuman animal has a "desire to live" because there isn't proof they understand personal mortality.
as for whether they have the capacity to suffer, which is all that sentience really seems to require, you can't prove that they don't have the capacity to suffer because you can't prove a negative. the best you can say is that you don't think there is enough evidence to support a claim that they ARE sentient.
if you saw a human from a tribe who spoke a language you would never understand, how do you know they feel pain and want to live? if you kick a dog, how do you know the dog didn't enjoy it? maybe people who are asleep dont feel pain or want to live. lets just eat people in comas, or who speak other languages, and lets beat dogs because its so unclear whether they like it or not
Animals must just run from danger because the wind pushes them that way. Wonder why dogs wag their tails when they see humans. Strange. Nah no proof they have desires or fears
none of this is proof they understand personal mortality, which is the crux if this disagreement.
No it's not the crux. Avoiding danger to protect their lives is pretty good proof.
A man follows a woman and she runs away.
The man: "she could still wanna have sex"
Maybe you'd be better seeing all the animals that mourn deaths of others.
you're observing behavior and assuming cognition. you need to prove the cognition, and behavior is evidence but not proof.
-said the man, still following the woman
accusing your interlocutors of sexual deviancy is a classic ad hominem.
this "no you are" tactic has a latin name
mourning death of others is not proof that an animal know it, itself, might die.
ah the "I'm not touching you" argument
this distinction is the crux of the matter. your inability to address it meaningfully and nonsequitur of an accusation belie either a lack of understanding or a malicious intent to engage in bad faith. i can see no other explanation.
you should reread this.
show one
maybe sentience or wanting to live aren't metrics we should use as the basis of our morality.
no, you are just the only one stupid enough to think its unprovable
i didn't say it's unprovable. you're putting words in my mouth.
You're one to talk. No you said "you cant prove" like a million times
you're saying i said you can't prove something i didn't say you couldn't prove though. you literally invented a position.
no, no i didn't.
anyone can follow this comment chain up to see exactly what i've said and where you put words in my mouth.
weird how your comments got downvoted and mine got upvoted
bandwagon fallacy.
wrong.
why should those be the metrics on which you base morality?
Do you wish to feel pain, or be murdered? Probably not, so why would you do it to someone else with the capacity to feel pain and desire to live? Empathy is the basis.
sometimes pain is necessary or even good. and the only creature i know of which understands personal mortality, and so can have a desire to live, is humans, and i think homicide is bad, but i don't think that is related to having a desire to live.
but you havent spoken to all humans. you haven't proven they feel pain. pain being a necessity or good is your opinion. If I think, "hmm i like being raped", does that make it okay to do to others, or should i be smart enough to see that other people dont like it WITHOUT having to literally fucking ask them. What does this argument matter when you are the kind of mf who wouldn't understand consent. "Uh your honor, they didnt say they werent enjoying it and thus there was no other way to tell they didnt want to have sex"
another accusation of sexual deviancy coupled with a demonstration that you don't actually understand the topic. brilliant.
calling me stupid doesn't undermine my position or bolster yours.
more ad hominem.
right.