Foie Gras - Was: Lounge->Doing right now?

[fromderinside]

To which civilization in this world are you referring?

 

[angelo]

Our civilization. Forget Islamic countries, they're never going to comply anyway. They don't comprehend the word humane.

 

[Bronzeage]

I suppose that's why running a herd of buffalo over a cliff always resulted in hard to chew steaks.

Seems to me that causing animals to fall upon one another after a jolting crash from fifty to two hundred feet would tenderize the meat. Don't you use a similar process to tenderize sirloin for sandwiches?

Seriously its an open question terminal whether fear or stress impacts meat quality. It is known that seeing death leads bovines to panic, stampede, commit suicide, trying to escape. More likely that is why we conceal dying from those next in line.

As for standards that are animal specific, The fact is all I see are anthropomorphic reasons for any animal morality statements. That such should constitute a morality statement for animals says a lot about moral statements in general.

There was a time when killing an animal meant the difference between life of death for humans, so anything that put meat on the fire was morally proper. The buffalo weren't run over the cliff to tenderize their meat. It was the only way to kill one, even if it meant pain and suffering, along with trauma for the survivors. These days, we have the luxury killing in ways that soothe our feelings about killing and life in general, but we still kill in order to live.

A quick painless death maybe less stressful for the animal, but we do it for our own selfish reasons.

 

[angelo]

True, and to be honest, it wouldn't take much to push me over into the vegetarian way of life. If i had to hunt and kill my own dinner, I would starve to death!

 

[fromderinside]

True, and to be honest, it wouldn't take much to push me over into the vegetarian way of life. If i had to hunt and kill my own dinner, I would starve to death!

Naw. If you died it wouldn't be from wont of trying to produce food by any means.

OK Bronzeage. We agree tenderness has no part to play in the manner of death of our culinary victims. So morality is a set of rules built around surviving. What did we or our predecessors use when there was no theory linking survival to existence and before one or several deities were invented? Does this apply as well to social vertebrates or mammals? Wolves seem to share common social traits regarding young, old, consumption, and sex. Similarly some social modern bony fresh water fishes, teleosts, (mouth breeders come to mind) and some birds (Ducks studied at U Maryland by E. Hess). Not morality? Actually challenging your language requirement.

 

[angelo]

I couldn't even kill a chook. I did once, but couldn't bring myself to eat it.

 

[Bronzeage]

True, and to be honest, it wouldn't take much to push me over into the vegetarian way of life. If i had to hunt and kill my own dinner, I would starve to death!

Naw. If you died it wouldn't be from wont of trying to produce food by any means.

OK Bronzeage. We agree tenderness has no part to play in the manner of death of our culinary victims. So morality is a set of rules built around surviving. What did we or our predecessors use when there was no theory linking survival to existence and before one or several deities were invented? Does this apply as well to social vertebrates or mammals? Wolves seem to share common social traits regarding young, old, consumption, and sex. Similarly some social modern bony fresh water fishes, teleosts, (mouth breeders come to mind) and some birds (Ducks studied at U Maryland by E. Hess). Not morality? Actually challenging your language requirement.

I don't really understand what you are saying.

Wolves kill large mammals by running them to exhaustion and them tearing flesh from the bones with their teeth. A wolf doesn't really have another option. Morality, for humans at least, predates deities. There has to be a social structure before things such as abstract concepts of God can exist, and social structure depends upon living in cooperation within the group.

 

[angelo]

Yes I know that this is wolf eat wolf world, that there's predators and and victims. But homo sapiens at some time developed a sub conscious. This sc is stronger in some than it is in others.

 

[DBT]

Conscience? Mirror neurons/Empathy...

 

[Malintent]

99% of all animals die a horrible death, usually involving being torn apart and eaten by a larger, scarier animal.

Humans kill animals with far less 'drama' and impact to the animal than every other animal on the planet.

So.. props to us!

 

[Bronzeage]

99% of all animals die a horrible death, usually involving being torn apart and eaten by a larger, scarier animal.

Humans kill animals with far less 'drama' and impact to the animal than every other animal on the planet.

So.. props to us!

One of the peculiar aspects of the human animal is our very long childhood. In humans, what would be called the parental instinct in other animals, has become a very complicated learned and socialized trait. A bird doesn't need lessons in nest building, or feeding baby birds. Humans have to do it the hard way.

Since our survival depends upon learned behavior, we have developed an very complicated learning process. There is no way to prevent learned traits from spilling over into other important areas. The empathy and compassion traits we learn in order to keep our children alive, sometimes clouds the learned traits by which we feed ourselves. The animals which once were our prey, become pseudo children. This becomes more intense as we change from hunter gatherers to herdsmen, shepherds and farmers. When we feed an animal, it is impossible for a human to avoid parental feelings, even when the animal is destined to be slaughtered for food.

 

[fromderinside]

Wolves kill large mammals by running them to exhaustion and them tearing flesh from the bones with their teeth. A wolf doesn't really have another option. Morality, for humans at least, predates deities. There has to be a social structure before things such as abstract concepts of God can exist, and social structure depends upon living in cooperation within the group.

Taking wolves which you a least found some social structure which you over severely limited. Hungary wolves will attack bears, a larger, more solitary animal by harassing the poor thing to exhaustion. An option in your words. They adapt socially to their situation and their prey.

The only links are weakening of their adversary and numbers a sufficient foundation for morality don't you think?

Dogs self recognize so there is something there for persistence of memory which might be a tactic one would take given there is basis for moral behavior in other social animals. Do they respect their dead? hmmmnnn. Is there more than just a dominance hierarchy among them and is that hierarchy the same in encampment and hunt?

No back to the others who addressed you after you addressed me.

... The empathy and compassion traits we learn in order to keep our children alive, sometimes clouds the learned traits by which we feed ourselves. The animals which once were our prey, become pseudo children. ...

Perhaps that is why wolves were able to become pets for humans?

Another problem for those who don't think morality is more anciently embedded than  Tarsiers.

 

[Bronzeage]

Taking wolves which you a least found some social structure which you over severely limited. Hungary wolves will attack bears, a larger, more solitary animal by harassing the poor thing to exhaustion. An option in your words. They adapt socially to their situation and their prey.

The only links are weakening of their adversary and numbers a sufficient foundation for morality don't you think?

Dogs self recognize so there is something there for persistence of memory which might be a tactic one would take given there is basis for moral behavior in other social animals. Do they respect their dead? hmmmnnn. Is there more than just a dominance hierarchy among them and is that hierarchy the same in encampment and hunt?

No back to the others who addressed you after you addressed me.

... The empathy and compassion traits we learn in order to keep our children alive, sometimes clouds the learned traits by which we feed ourselves. The animals which once were our prey, become pseudo children. ...

Perhaps that is why wolves were able to become pets for humans?

Another problem for those who don't think morality is more anciently embedded than  Tarsiers.

What exactly are you arguing? A bear is a large mammal and the only option a wolf has for killing a bear is to run it to exhaustion and then tear it's flesh. Is there another choice of methods? Until wolves learn to set traps, or maybe develop a canine bow and arrow, they're going to be stuck with the chasing and biting thing.

Technical point. Canines have a social structure very similar to human family structure. There is a hierarchy, cooperative hunting and protection of the young. This allowed dogs to be assimilated into human families. The concept of "pet" is fairly new, on the time scale of history. Dogs were working animals and often food. Pets are found in cultures where there is a surplus of food and non-productive animals can be supported.

 

[fromderinside]

Taking wolves which you a least found some social structure which you over severely limited. Hungary wolves will attack bears, a larger, more solitary animal by harassing the poor thing to exhaustion. An option in your words. They adapt socially to their situation and their prey.

The only links are weakening of their adversary and numbers a sufficient foundation for morality don't you think?

Dogs self recognize so there is something there for persistence of memory which might be a tactic one would take given there is basis for moral behavior in other social animals. Do they respect their dead? hmmmnnn. Is there more than just a dominance hierarchy among them and is that hierarchy the same in encampment and hunt?

No back to the others who addressed you after you addressed me.



Perhaps that is why wolves were able to become pets for humans?

Another problem for those who don't think morality is more anciently embedded than  Tarsiers.

What exactly are you arguing? A bear is a large mammal and the only option a wolf has for killing a bear is to run it to exhaustion and then tear it's flesh. Is there another choice of methods? Until wolves learn to set traps, or maybe develop a canine bow and arrow, they're going to be stuck with the chasing and biting thing.

Technical point. Canines have a social structure very similar to human family structure. There is a hierarchy, cooperative hunting and protection of the young. This allowed dogs to be assimilated into human families. The concept of "pet" is fairly new, on the time scale of history. Dogs were working animals and often food. Pets are found in cultures where there is a surplus of food and non-productive animals can be supported.

First: The bear doesn't run from the wolves. duh.

Second: Dogs are predators like humans. that humans were able to domesticate to the point where they would work for us is a big, big, evolutionary step for them and us. Even bigger is those we'd domesticated for labor became pets because we selected them for human like qualities in their appearance and behaviors. It probably preceded farming, perhaps was the basis for farming.

 

[Bronzeage]

What exactly are you arguing? A bear is a large mammal and the only option a wolf has for killing a bear is to run it to exhaustion and then tear it's flesh. Is there another choice of methods? Until wolves learn to set traps, or maybe develop a canine bow and arrow, they're going to be stuck with the chasing and biting thing.

Technical point. Canines have a social structure very similar to human family structure. There is a hierarchy, cooperative hunting and protection of the young. This allowed dogs to be assimilated into human families. The concept of "pet" is fairly new, on the time scale of history. Dogs were working animals and often food. Pets are found in cultures where there is a surplus of food and non-productive animals can be supported.

First: The bear doesn't run from the wolves. duh.

Second: Dogs are predators like humans. that humans were able to domesticate to the point where they would work for us is a big, big, evolutionary step for them and us. Even bigger is those we'd domesticated for labor became pets because we selected them for human like qualities in their appearance and behaviors. It probably preceded farming, perhaps was the basis for farming.

I love "duh", at the end of a comment. It's like phd, after a signature.

First: A bear might not run from a wolf, but it will run from a pack of wolves. It's likely a pack would take a carcass from a wolf, and there would be little the bear could do about it. A bear can't eat and fight at the same time, but the wolves can take turns. If the bear insisted on contesting the carcass, it would become the wolfpack's next meal. In any case, the fates of the bear, the wolves, and whatever the carcass used to be, would not be considered "humane" in any sense of the word. Non-humans predators, in their natural state generally lack the tools to inflict a quick and painless death. It's only in our later years, as a species, that it's become a concern to us, as predators.

Second: A statement of irrelevant facts does not support an argument or form a rebuttal.

 

[angelo]

Nature is eat and be eaten in the animal kingdom.

 

[Underseer]

Why eating something (foie gras) that requires extreme cruelty to animals to be produced?

Didnt you know that or do you not care?

Is it the cruelty, or the extreme cruelty, that is the problem?

Before a goose ends up on a serving platter, it will be killed by some method. I've seen chickens shoved headfirst into a funnel, which holds them immobile while a worker cuts their throats and they bleed to death. It took about a minute for them to stop kicking and cease those horrible noises. This was on an organic chicken farm, where I assume the chickens had a nice life, up to that point.

I know force feeding a goose in order for its diseased liver to be marketable seems gruesome to a human, but how do we know the goose doesn't like it?

- - - Updated - - -

Great, now this can-of-worms that had fizzled out and died is re-opened so I can spend my Sunday defending myself from attacks.

If you brought red wine and crackers, I got your back, bro.

While we can argue about qualia and have an esoteric debate about what the goose experiences when it is held immobile most or all of its life and force fed far more than it would willingly eat, I have a hard time believing that such an existence would in any way be pleasant.

Yes, it's theoretically possible that geese love being treated like this, but on the whole I think it is reasonable to argue that they likely don't.

Yeah, I get that some measure of animal cruelty is necessary to produce meat for human consumption, but I really think foie gras goes too far. By the same token, I'm fine with animal testing, but I'm also glad that researchers who work with animals have ethical standards regarding how the animals are treated, and hold each other to that standard.

 

[fromderinside]

I love "duh", at the end of a comment. It's like phd, after a signature.

Great. fromderinside, PhD.

First: A bear might not run from a wolf, but it will run from a pack of wolves. It's likely a pack would take a carcass from a wolf, and there would be little the bear could do about it. A bear can't eat and fight at the same time, but the wolves can take turns. If the bear insisted on contesting the carcass, it would become the wolfpack's next meal. In any case, the fates of the bear, the wolves, and whatever the carcass used to be, would not be considered "humane" in any sense of the word. Non-humans predators, in their natural state generally lack the tools to inflict a quick and painless death. It's only in our later years, as a species, that it's become a concern to us, as predators.

I take your point that a brown bear might run from a pack of more than five wolves. Other bears like the Kodiak, being pretty big would probably threaten the wolves into retreat, ultimately into looking elsewhere for food. A Grisly, both bigger and more aggressive than brown bears are not likely to run either. Its more likely to attack forcing the wolves to either go for the kill or to retreat as they would from the huge Kodiak. Wolves aren't cowards or fools. I think the whole point here is whether top predator hunters species are just instinctively driven or whether they use tactical judgement. I go with tactical judgement,even thinking making them very highly advanced in the top predator business.

There is stuff there in your post that lights me up.

First bolded. Huh?

Why would a bear interfere with a pack of wolves taking a carcass from a wolf? I know .......

second bolded. Huh II?

Even your pet dog goes for the throat and its target goes for a submission posture if the throat attack is achieved. Animals don't usually kill for sport either. Still pups play attack and defend all the time, even adults within a pack are occasionally seen to play such with the result of the clamping wolf releasing the submitting wolf. Works to reduce needless killing, protect kin, and to decrease need for supporting additional birthing. That's argument. So much for your point about humane.

Second: A statement of irrelevant facts does not support an argument or form a rebuttal.

Whats irrelevant about responding to

Morality, for humans at least, predates deities. There has to be a social structure before things such as abstract concepts of God can exist, and social structure depends upon living in cooperation within the group.

With

Dogs are predators like humans. that humans were able to domesticate to the point where they would work for us is a big, big, evolutionary step for them and us. Even bigger is those we'd domesticated for labor became pets because we selected them for human like qualities in their appearance and behaviors. It probably preceded farming, perhaps was the basis for farming.

All I was doing was fleshing out a wolf morality predates human articulation and deep thinking about deities. I even took it further to suggest wolf domestication was probably part of the impetus for human farming.

FDI, PhD (last time ever)

 

[Unbeatable]

This isn't going to get anyone to reconsider their position. Also this thread isn't for arguments. If you'd like to discuss the morality of meat eating, make a thread in Morals & Principles.

Its a rational forum is it not?

No, it is not, and it hasn't been for several years. I think the last time this was a rational forum, the place was still called IIDB.

 

[DBT]

No, it is not, and it hasn't been for several years. I think the last time this was a rational forum, the place was still called IIDB.

Not sure why you think that. What do you believe has changed?