Dog meat: There are countries that eat it !

[mb23100]

Needs more disney cartoons of octopi.

We prefer pussy

 

[Deleted member 158611]

Doesn't bother me. The same as eating pigs or other animals.

By the way, I've had dogs my whole life and enjoy eating bacon, steak, wings, etc.

 

[Vil7]

Their psychological suffering is like a natural marinade.

I hated myself for laughing at this post.

 

[wonderbread]

Had it when I was in Vietnam.. Wasn't bad actually.. Had some Poodle and Jack Russell Tapas.

 

[Roca]

It grosses me out because I love doggies but I eat other types of meat so I've got no grounds to judge.

*shrug*

 

[Codger]

I'd happily kill my neighbour's dog. I might even eat it to hide evidence. Yappy little fucker.

 

[Codger]

There is zero difference between dogs or cows or pigs or goats etc. Killing them all is equally disgusting and sadistic and unnenecessary imposition of pain and suffering. Every country simply has their own hypocrisy as to which animal to consider "sacred."

Must be some difference. Surely there is a continuum? Bacteria at one end, humans at the other. Is killing roaches sadistic?

 

[chubbman]

The sausage king doesn't eat pork? What in the fuck?

The sausage king doesn't eat pork
Zer isn't Asian

My entire sherdog life has been a lie

 

[leto1776]

If you're in Korea and want to try dog, a friend of mine once told me while I was there to look for restaurants that are well known for it. Some restaurants will serve it, but it won't be as good as the specialty restaurants.

 

[Codger]

What the hell do roaches have to do with anything? I dont think you quite got my point buddeh.

You said there is no difference between various animals of varying intelligence/awareness. "There is zero difference between dogs or cows or pigs or goats etc. Killing them all is equally disgusting and sadistic and unnenecessary imposition of pain and suffering. "

I'm saying there is a difference and that all animals have varying amounts of intelligence and awareness and that there is a continuum with humans at one end and simpler animals at the other.

What part of your point didn't I get and why?

 

[Codger]

It's not about intelligence. Its about what has preceeded intelligence by hundreds of millions of years - the neurons, the ability to feel the "ouch". I was saying that mammals have an extremely developed capability for pain and suffering, be it dogs or cows or pigs or goats or whatever, they all feel just as much as we do. My point is, dont impose unnecessary harm to anything that has neurons. Of course there is a continuum, it just has nothing to do with the thrust of my original post.

It's not just intelligence, it's awareness. A human would suss out that something was really wrong about the situation as they were being herded into an abbatoir. Other animals, including mammals, less so. I'd say a pig is more likely to sense a bad situation than a more stupid cow.

Then there is the experience we call pain: Almost all animals have neurons, not just mammals. Even earth worms and insects. So if your policy is not produce harm to anything with neurons you'd better not be crushing roaches. But pain isn't as simple as merely having neurons, it's about nociception and the experience of that. And pain is not merely nociception. Nociception is the brain receiving messages from pain receptors and we know various lower animals, including insects appear to receive and react to such signals. Pain is the experience created by the brain in response to nociception. Whether animals experience it as the same sort of pain humans do is unknown. Even in humans, the link between nociception and pain is not linear at all. You can have strong nociception and feel very little or visa versa. This is commonplace in observations of things like nerve pain from back injuries. It's possible insects suffer pain the same as us not not at all. We can't know for sure.

But some scientists believe that human-style pain requires a level of emotional sophistication to add meaning to the nociception. Therefore animals with higher emotional abilities (which is very much aligned with intelligence) might suffer more pain than less able ones. To whit, a pig may suffer more than a more stupid animal.

So you see my continuum argument is very much pertinent to the claim that all mammals suffer the same.

 

[ookii]

Spoiler tags man on those roasted dogs next time dude


unless they are chihuahuas

 

[Banchan]

If you're in Korea and want to try dog, a friend of mine once told me while I was there to look for restaurants that are well known for it. Some restaurants will serve it, but it won't be as good as the specialty restaurants.

if you want to eat dog you should eat it in your own country.

 

[Codger]

I have no clue whether you are agreeing with me or not. Seems like you are trying to look smart typing a wall of unnecessary text. Its easy. If you can go without hurting a sentient thing, dont hurt it. Do your best to not impose unnecessary harm. Thats all it's about - valueing the only thing that is important in this universe - the capability to feel the "ouch".

No. I'm making a cogent argument using entirely necessary text. If you don't happen to understand it then that's your problem. If you actually read what I wrote and understand it, you'll see why it's relevant. It's about, as you put it, the "ouch" but it's a bit more complex that you clearly think.

 

[Codger]

You are arguing over irrelevancies. I am just focusing on the thrust of my post.

Why is the difference between nociception and pain irrelevant?

 

[Codger]

Because it's irrelevant in the context of my post. You are for whatever reason arguing about the existence of continuum which I dont even disagree with. My point is very simple - if it has neurons, be considerate to it, dont hurt it for no good reason. Thats it. No need to go any deeper than that.

Your point was that all the animals you listed suffered the same and that intelligence has nothing to do with it. I'm saying the evidence says otherwise. That's relevant.

I'm saying that suffering is not the same as having neurons but an experiential thing related to brain abilities which are closely aligned with intelligence. A human certainly suffers more than a roach and probably more than a cow. I also introduced the idea that it's just about the moment of death but also the lead up which again is related to the animals ability to perceive the threat and suffer from that stress. Again, an ability related to intelligence. It's well known by farmers that different animals appear to "know something is up" as they approach the abbatoir and some seem entirely oblivious to it. If true then pigs suffer more than say chickens.

You're now moving away from that point and saying don't hurt anything with neurons. That's a different position and a defensible one, especially if you can honestly say that you don't use roach spray or kill flies etc. I think that in reality most people act as if the continuum is true and feel worse the most sentient they believe the animal to be.

 

[Codger]

Well you did say "There is zero difference between dogs or cows or pigs or goats etc". I think there is both from the position of pain perception and threat perception (leading up the slaughter). That's probably what we're disagreeing about.

Another thing to bear in mind is that everything dies and most things suffer when they die. Wild animals often freeze to death, starve over many weeks because they lose their last set of teeth, from disease, get eaten alive by predators and so on. You can count the number who "pass away peacefully in their sleep" on one hand I'd imagine. Whilst they're alive they also suffer from disease and the stress of simply trying to survive in an insanely competitive environment. Farm animals have comparably easy lives and then get killed without warning, ideally using "humane" methods involving brain stunning. I think that's quite an enviable life compared to plenty of wild animals, and even some humans who have to go through years of cancer and dementia before they get relief.

Some might say that it would be kinder to not cause them to live in the first place by farming them but then that's akin to saying life is worthless because it ends in death and that's certainly not true for humans.

I'm personally not entirely clear what is so bad about a good life followed by a quick, unexpected death?

 

[Codger]

I meant intelligence has nothing to do with our ethics. Just because a pig cant read or do math does not exempt it from our considerations. The fact that it has a very high capacity for pain and suffering is what its all about, not intelligence per se. Thats what I meant by saying "has nothing to do with it" I meant in regards to ethics.
@Codger

Well it certainly does have a high capacity for suffering but part of that is BECAUSE of it's relatively powerful brain (see my post on nociception not being the same as pain experience). I'm saying that perhaps a pig should have more consideration than a chicken because of it's greater ability to suffer.

 

[USA!USA!]

I'm personally not entirely clear what is so bad about a good life followed by a quick, unexpected death?

This - as long as there is no pain or cruelty involved, I am OK with eating animals if they are farmed.

I still feel weird about the dog thing though because I love my pet dog. I know they are just animals, but people dont have pet cows or pet pigs most of the time in their house. You cant play frisbee with a cow or fetch with a chicken. Their social intereactions with humans are unique and it is different.

 

[Codger]

This - as long as there is no pain or cruelty involved, I am OK with eating animals if they are farmed.

I still feel weird about the dog thing though because I love my pet dog. I know they are just animals, but people dont have pet cows or pet pigs most of the time in their house. You cant play frisbee with a cow or fetch with a chicken. Their social intereactions with humans are unique and it is different.

Whilst I'm sure 90% of people's qualms about dog meat is down to social reasons like pet ownership, I think there is a case to say they would suffer more than farm animals. Farm animals were bred to be farmed and their behaviour has been altered to make them docile etc. Dogs have been bred to interact with humans, consider humans their friends etc. Farming them would have a different effect to say a chicken IMO.