{"id":854,"date":"2019-01-01T13:51:13","date_gmt":"2019-01-01T13:51:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/skywritings\/?p=854"},"modified":"2019-01-01T13:51:13","modified_gmt":"2019-01-01T13:51:13","slug":"doubts-and-benefits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/skywritings\/2019\/01\/01\/doubts-and-benefits\/","title":{"rendered":"Doubts and Benefits"},"content":{"rendered":"

In “Consider the Oyster<\/a>,” Christopher Cox [CC] seems to me to be rather glib in discussing animal suffering, even though his heart seems to be roughly in the right place:<\/p>\n

CC:<\/b> \u201cThere are dozens of reasons to become a vegan, but just two should suffice: Raising animals for food (1) destroys the planet and (2) causes those animals to suffer…\u00a0
\n    While there are limitless ways in which humans are different from nonhuman animals, one thing we share with most is the ability to feel pain.”<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So far, this all seems both kind and reasonable. (I would add only that (3) eating animals isn’t necessary for human survival and health.)<\/p>\n

But then: <\/p>\n

CC:<\/b> \u201c[S]ince oysters don’t have a central nervous system, they’re unlikely to experience pain in a way resembling ours\u201d<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

1. Oysters (like all bivalve molluscs) don\u2019t have a central<\/i> nervous system, but they do have a nervous system, including a nociceptive<\/a> (pain-sensing) system that resembles the nociciceptive system in other invertebrates as well as vertebrates, anatomically, physiologically, and pharmacologically<\/a>.<\/p>\n

2. The issue is surely not whether the way<\/i> other species experience pain resembles the way humans do, but whether<\/i> they experience pain, i.e., whether they suffer.<\/p>\n

CC:<\/b> \u201cWe also can’t state with complete confidence that plants do, or do not, feel pain\u201d<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We can\u2019t feel anyone else\u2019s pain. So forget about “complete confidence” when it comes to what or even whether others feel. (On doubt vs. certainty<\/a>, see Descartes<\/a>!) This is called the \u201cother minds problem<\/a>“, and it applies to our own species too \u2014 and not only to prelinguistic infants but even to people telling<\/i> you that they are in pain: You believe them, and give them the benefit of any doubt, because of their similarities to you and your own own pain. Those similarities are both behavioral and neural. And oysters share them (even though they can’t talk). It’s just a matter of degree.<\/p>\n

Plants, in contrast, do not share these behavioral and neural similarities (fortunately, because even if they did share them, we would have to eat them anyway, or else we could not survive). Plants lack nervous systems altogether (although there is a bit of controversy<\/a> over some more general similarities with tissue signalling systems that fall in the category of information transmission rather than feeling).<\/p>\n

Not so of cows and pigs and chickens and fish and lobsters and, yes, oysters: They do have nervous systems. They do behave and function as if they feel pain. And it is not necessary to hurt, kill and eat them, for human survival and health.<\/p>\n

So why are we speculating on the possibility that despite having nociceptive systems and despite behaving like creatures that feel pain, oysters might not feel pain? If it were a life-or-death survival issue, we would have to do the same as we do with plants, and hope they don\u2019t feel.<\/p>\n

But it is not a life-or-death survival issue:<\/p>\n

CC:<\/b> \u201cmake an exception for oysters\u2014for it is surely foolish to deprive yourself of an icy plate of white-shelled Watch Hills.\u201d<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In other words, CC is proposing to withold the benefit of the doubt from oysters simply because he likes the taste<\/a> \u2014 which is more or less the justification of most meat eaters for eating cows and pigs and chickens and fish and lobsters.<\/p>\n

Not something to speak about so glibly, I think.<\/p>\n

Yes, it would be far better if everyone ate only oysters and plants, rather than cows and pigs and chickens and fish and lobsters.<\/p>\n

But why not just eat plants only, and give the oysters, too, the benefit of the doubt? It\u2019s not just a matter of taste, but of compassion.<\/p>\n

[And is it not idle — if not callous — to speculate about whether it would be more destructive to the planet to feed the growing number of human mouths<\/a> by cultivating oysters vs. cultivating plants (or waiting for a way to clone meat<\/a>) while taking human population growth<\/a> for granted, rather than seriously considering ways to reduce or reverse it?]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In “Consider the Oyster,” Christopher Cox [CC] seems to me to be rather glib in discussing animal suffering, even though his heart seems to be roughly in the right place: CC: \u201cThere are dozens of reasons to become a vegan, but just two should suffice: Raising animals for food (1) destroys the planet and (2) … <\/p>\n