7405de60
XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, rec.sport.football.college,
rec.food.cooking
XPost: alt.gothic
From: rupertmccallum@yahoo.com
On Oct 24, 12:08 am, dh@. wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 11:52:18 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Oct 22, 8:02 pm, dh@. wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 06:53:41 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Oct 18, 8:14 pm, dh@. wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:29:18 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >On Oct 16, 7:25 pm, dh@. wrote:
> >> >> >> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 03:14:04 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
> >> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >On Oct 15, 11:14 pm, Goo wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> Rupert is off doing telemarketing in Germany at present.
>
> >> >> >> >I am doing a post-doc at the University of M nster.
>
> >> >> >> Here's an easy experiment for you, but please be honest about the
results.
> >> >> >> Ask some of the students if they can comprehend the distinction
between lives
> >> >> >> which are of positive value and lives which are of negative value
for different
> >> >> >> beings.
>
> >> >> >It's a bit difficult to do that. I don't have any teaching duties and
> >> >> >I don't speak German very well. Would you like me to ask some of my
> >> >> >colleagues?
>
> >> >> Yes please. And if they can come up with a better definition than mine
I'd
> >> >> like to learn about that too, but so far I believe mine covers it as
well as it
> >> >> can without causing excessive restrictions on the idea. No offense,
but I
> >> >> consider "good" to be an excessive restriction.
>
> >> >I asked Petra and Stefan. Petra said "What does he mean by positive
> >> >value?" I tried to give them some idea of what I thought you meant by
> >> >it.
>
> >> What did you tell them?
>
> >I told them that I think it's got something to do with the idea of a
> >life which contains a balance of pleasant experiences over aversive
> >experiences.
>
> Not enough suffering to make it of negative value is my answer. From
there
> they would need to figure out what it means to them if they can. Just because
> you can't doesn't mean other people can't. Remember we were doing it in grade
> school, so it seems ANYONE in high school or above should certainly be able
to
> do it as wall.
>
Presumably here "figure out what it means to them" means "make up your
own criteria for how to determine whether the concept applies or not".
Obviously I would be capable of formulating such criteria, but that's
not my job. It's your phrase, and it's your job to specify the
criteria for evaluating whether or not the phrase applies to an actual
situation.
> >> >They both seemed to think it would be pretty hard to determine
> >> >whether a cow has a life of positive value,
>
> >> Not for a person who is familiar with the cow and its life. You can bet
> >> there are lots of farmers who have a pretty good idea about how their
animals
> >> are doing and whether they are overly stressed or not. Here's something I
feel
> >> sure you've heard before but can't afford to appreciate: Cow produce milk
a lot
> >> better when they aren't stressed and unhappy.
>
> >The measures which the modern dairy industry take to ensure that cows
> >produce milk most certainly make them very stressed and unhappy. I've
> >already given you information about that.
>
> I've spent hundreds of hours on dairy farms and the cows all seemed happy
> enough. The only time they acted stressed at all was when the farmer was a
> little bit late with feeding. That's not enough to make their lives of
negative
> value instead of positive value imo. In fact since anticipation is something
> humans enjoy, it might add positive value to cows' lives as well even if they
> can't appreciate it.
When did you have occasion to visit dairy farms? Were you working
there? Where were these farms?
Do you think that the information that I have provided about welfare
issues for dairy cows is just factually mistaken?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
