aaea8409   
   XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.global-warming   
      
   On Fri, 21 May 2010 16:59:19 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist   
    wrote:   
      
   >Why should the onus fall on animals, whatever their species, to prove   
   >that they are sentient if a broad-ranging review of both the   
   >scientific and philosophic literature shows that animals think and   
   >feel and are sentient and show morality?   
   >   
   >Philosophers have routinely dismissed animals as unthinking, unfeeling   
   >beasts-Descartes grouped non-human animals with machines, a line of   
   >logic that has been used to justify callous treatment of laboratory   
   >animals.   
   >   
   >But recent research creates a compelling case for blurring the line   
   >between animal and human perception, thereby questioning the   
   >prevailing scientific orthodoxy that humans alone possess the ability   
   >to reason.   
   >   
   >Over the years, studies have shown that animals have intelligence   
   >(dolphins have been known to teach themselves to delay gratification   
   >to get extra treats), emotions (like humans, baboon mothers show   
   >elevated levels of glucocorticoids after losing an infant), cunning   
   >(gorillas divert the attention of rivals from food, often by   
   >grooming); that they can communicate (nuthatches can translate   
   >chickadee chirps), can be altruistic (chimps who know how to unlatch a   
   >door help those who can't).   
   >   
   >If this is true should we continue treating animals cruelly and   
   >carelessly?   
      
       No. We should provide them with decent lives of positive   
   value before using them for food. Millions of them are already,   
   btw.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)