or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Death or This God-awful threak?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Death or This God-awful threak? - Page 20

post #286 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosu3 View Post
You are being pretty vague. Are you now suggesting animals don't have emotions or can't form bonds with humans? Do you want proof in general or in this specific case? What would be an example of proof?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gomestar View Post
And once again, please offer proof to your statement that pigs form bonds with farmers and it is the ultimate betrayal to the pigs' trust when they are eventually put down.

I am not being vague at all, it's pretty clear what I'm asking for. I am not suggesting anything nor forcing views on somebody ... I merely want explanation and some sort of proof to the very bold statement you made. I am not talking about animal emotions or bonds with humans (which I do believe some animals may be capable of). Rather, I'm look for anything that talks about the apparent bond of trust between farm animals (cows, pigs, chickens) and the farmers. Bonus points are awarded if it discusses the tragedy behind breaking this bond and the betrayal that is mutual to all parties. You have posted plenty of articles on this thread on other statements you have made (though most have not been sufficient proof of your argument), I can't imagine this would be met with much more difficulty if it is indeed true as you claim.
post #287 of 345
The whole purpose of the farm owners 'fostering a trust relationship' with the pig was to condition the pig. This makes it easier to feed and care for them. Would it have been more humane for the farm owners to treat the pigs indifferently/harshly and then slaughter them for food? It seems like you, Nosu, are trying to say that the farms owners were more 'culpable' because they treated the animals with dignity. This seems to be a strange arrangement:

Treat the pigs well before slaughter - evil because of a breach of trust

Treat the pigs indifferently/poorly before slaughter - merely bad.
post #288 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by IUtoSLU View Post
The whole purpose of the farm owners 'fostering a trust relationship' with the pig was to condition the pig. This makes it easier to feed and care for them.

but is this actually forming a bond of trust between both parties, or is this merely treating the pig well so it eats and isn't living a life of abuse?
post #289 of 345
I remember watching Charlotte's Web as a kid and that pig seemed pretty smart.
post #290 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark from Plano View Post
I remember watching Charlotte's Web as a kid and that pig seemed pretty smart.

You are old enough to remember Green Acres and Arnold.
post #291 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by gomestar View Post
but is this actually forming a bond of trust between both parties, or is this merely treating the pig well so it eats and isn't living a life of abuse?

I think the farm owners cried for the same reason that you cried because your fish died. You had developed a 'relationship' with the animal. It seems very plausible and natural for humans to develop bonds with animals that they interact with daily. The argument you are having with Nosu is whether the bonds are real or projected. I'm willing to concede that the bonds existed (even from the pig's point of view) because my question is different.

My question is: how is it worse that the farm owners had a pshychological attachment to the pigs (and vice versa) than if they had treated the pig indifferently/poorly? It seems to be a strange conclusion for an animal rights activist to prefer that pig farmers treat the pigs worse before slaughter than they could.
post #292 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by gomestar View Post
Rather, I'm look for anything that talks about the apparent bond of trust between farm animals (cows, pigs, chickens) and the farmers. Bonus points are awarded if it discusses the tragedy behind breaking this bond and the betrayal that is mutual to all parties. You have posted plenty of articles on this thread on other statements you have made (though most have not been sufficient proof of your argument), I can't imagine this would be met with much more difficulty if it is indeed true as you claim.

I don't think chickens have the cognitive ability for significant emotional feelings toward humans.
There is actually a new documentary along the lines of what you are describing. I think it's about a rancher who had a change of heart and turned the farm into a sanctuary for farm animals:

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.       I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.
post #293 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
If the human GI tract is "designed," are you now making a teleological argument for veganism? Please say you are.

Not going to bite (excuse the pun) on the start of this teleological argument you were proposing?
post #294 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by IUtoSLU View Post
Would it have been more humane for the farm owners to treat the pigs indifferently/harshly and then slaughter them for food? It seems like you, Nosu, are trying to say that the farms owners were more 'culpable' because they treated the animals with dignity. This seems to be a strange arrangement:

Pigs are much like dogs but more intelligent. If this article had been about pet dogs being shot in the head and eaten instead of pigs, maybe the "betrayal" would be more clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IUtoSLU View Post
I think the farm owners cried for the same reason that you cried because your fish died. You had developed a 'relationship' with the animal. It seems very plausible and natural for humans to develop bonds with animals that they interact with daily

My question is: how is it worse that the farm owners had a pshychological attachment to the pigs (and vice versa) than if they had treated the pig indifferently/poorly? It seems to be a strange conclusion for an animal rights activist to prefer that pig farmers treat the pigs worse before slaughter than they could.

I don't mean the animals should be treated poorly, but these pigs were being raised as pets. I am opposed to pig slaughter in the same way people would be opposed to dog or cat slaughter. I think the difference between a goldfish and pig is pretty significant, especially in human interaction. A goldfish doesn't have the emotional capabilities. A child crying from a fish dying on its own and adults crying after shooting their pigs in the head are two very different circumstances, it's unlikely their emotional responses are for the same reasons or at the same level.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Not going to bite (excuse the pun) on the start of this teleological argument you were proposing?

I just posted a link, wasn't really arguing anything. If you find something wrong in the article, point it out.
post #295 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosu3 View Post
I just posted a link, wasn't really arguing anything. If you find something wrong in the article, point it out.

I thought I already pointed it out?

Either way, I think you are a high quality poster to post links for no reason. Not everyone can pull that off.

Sadly though, you did make a strong statement that one would indicate the link was to defend:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosu3 View Post
Humans are designed for plant-based food consumption:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/94656/The-...tomy-of-Eating


Your statement also has the teleos issue.
post #296 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
I thought I already pointed it out?

Either way, I think you are a high quality poster to post links for no reason. Not everyone can pull that off.

Sadly though, you did make a strong statement that one would indicate the link was to defend:

Your statement also has the teleos issue.

I came across it randomly and thought it was interesting. The statement was more of an introduction to the article, you can replace the word "designed" with something less teleos, if that helps.
post #297 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosu3 View Post
I came across it randomly and thought it was interesting. The statement was more of an introduction to the article, you can replace the word "designed" with something less teleos, if that helps.

Again, very cool you just post random articles for no reason.
post #298 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark from Plano View Post
I remember watching Charlotte's Web as a kid and that pig seemed pretty smart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by redcaimen View Post
You are old enough to remember Green Acres and Arnold.

This is a difficult thing to resolve. Which serves as better proof of the personhood of pigs, Arnold from Green Acres or the pig from Charlotte's Web? We might need a poal.
post #299 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark from Plano View Post
This is a difficult thing to resolve. Which serves as better proof of the personhood of pigs, Arnold from Green Acres or the pig from Charlotte's Web? We might need a poal.

what about Babe?!?!
post #300 of 345
Napolean, Squealer, the Old General, etc?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Death or This God-awful threak?