Shambo The Bull

[Tomm]

Wtf are you talking about? Plants can't feel pain! They don’t have brains, pain receptors, nervous systems or anything like that. I've never heard anything so stupid.

Do you feel more empathy towards humans than you do towards chimps, or dogs, or cats? If so then you're doing exactly the same thing you are mocking vegetarians for doing - relating to something because it's similar to you.

I don’t really see why some people feel the need to shout out against vegetarianism. I mean what possible difference could it make to you life? I just don’t get it. Live and let live I say

[Dan Clark]

Plants are not almost genetically identical to animals, also you'll find most vegetarians who are doing it for the against animal cruelty thing won't wear leather shoes either.

[RicH_87]

i wish this thread would die as easy as it's subject.

[Rebelistic]

Animals do not suffer when being killed for food, in fact the lives they lead are far more wholesome and satisfying (through EU law) than they would be living in the wild.

Lastly, next time some hot-headed vegetarian is preaching how killing cows is wrong (with his mouth that has teeth in it designed for tearing through meat) ask him why his shoes are made of leather.

I think in many cases animals do suffer when being killed for food, as for their lives being more wholesome and satisfying than they would be in the wild - I very much doubt it. I know which I'd prefer.

My shoes are not made of leather - I try to avoid using amimal products. Do you come accross a lot of 'hot headed' vegetarians? - most seem like fairly humble compasionate people to me.

Cheers, - But yeah this thread is getting boring now.

[B.E.A.U]

i wish this thread would die as easy as it's subject.

agreed can't beleive your all still talking about it lol.

Its a bull hes gone

[Trials Punk]

This countries getting to bloody soft.

I can understand how they must feel, its something they loved. At the end of the day if my dog had something that could spread to other dogs I'd get it put down, if it meant only I had to suffer thats fine. It would stop alot more people suffering weather it was to do with money or love.

Anyway I need to stroke my gerkin.

[andyroo]

Wtf are you talking about? Plants can't feel pain! They don’t have brains, pain receptors, nervous systems or anything like that. I've never heard anything so stupid.

Do you feel more empathy towards humans than you do towards chimps, or dogs, or cats? If so then you're doing exactly the same thing you are mocking vegetarians for doing - relating to something because it's similar to you.

I don’t really see why some people feel the need to shout out against vegetarianism. I mean what possible difference could it make to you life? I just don’t get it. Live and let live I say

Please re-read my post re: pain. You obviously didn't read it properly, otherwise you would have answered your own question.

I dont feel empathy more for one species than I do another, IF I have no personal connection with them. As bad as it sounds (and this will be true for most), I would feel more sadness at my own hamster dying than I would for a whole heap of humans that I'd never met. Thats empathy for personal reasons, not empathy in principle, which is the impression that vegetarians give me when lecturing the wrongs of eating meat.

The reason that I find most vegetarians that I come across to be so frustrating is their inexplicable urge to justify their decision and to morally raise themselves above me with an air of, 'I'm saving the world, you're killing it, you must be Satan's human incarnation.'

I have many beliefs myself, but I choose not to make tutting noises and make disgusted faces at those who chose to do otherwise. I fully agree that this reflection does not represent the majority of vegetarians; in fact it is probably a minor selection of the group. Most veggies that are veggies for their own reasons and not to preach their morality to others I probably wouldn't even know about. The just behave like a mature individual with individual beliefs without the need to tread on my face about my own justifications.

Rebelistic; you think life in the wild compared to life under organic EU law is better? Most farm animals (pigs, cows, sheep, chickens) do not have the capability to survive on their own in the wild in this country! Anyway, what wild? I'd like to see this 'wild' you refer to, becasue I'm sure I could make a mint rearing sheep on it! Truely wild animals are always, starving, close to death, and in constant danger, with no consistent food or water source. Its like comparing homelessness to posh country living.

-

And to those that say 'I can't believe this thread is still going - drop it,' as posted in another chit-chat thread, it can be so obvious who are the younger members of the forum! Older members will quite happily 'chit-chat' and have a debate without resorting to insults, after all, this is a chit chat thread, whereas younger members seem to think they have the power and respect to be able to suggest that their post should be the be all and end all of a conversation topic! If the thread is too boring and adult for you, and you feel you cannot be mature enough to post in a relevant and consistant manner, please dont feel forced to enter it!

[Tomm]

The reason that I find most vegetarians that I come across to be so frustrating is their inexplicable urge to justify their decision and to morally raise themselves above me with an air of, 'I'm saving the world, you're killing it, you must be Satan's human incarnation.'

I'm not quite sure who you've been talking to. I never feel superior to anyone for being vegetarian - in fact quite the opposite - most non-vegetarians take the piss and I'm sure they feel slightly superior to me, calling me weird or stupid. Whatever, I don't really care. My reasons are my own and I certainly don't shout about them - In fact quite a few of my friends don't know I'm vegetarian... I think I have a slightly weird view on vegetarianism though - I fully understand the reasons behind eating meat - it's simple biology and food chains and I don't have a problem with humans (as a race) eating meat. Just on a personal level, I choose not to.

If you've spoken to vegetarians like in the quote above - that's because that person is a dick, not because they're a vegetarian (And before anyone says it, no it's not the same thing).

You were still talking complete shite about plants feeling pain - that's the exact same crap I would expect from some hippy vegan nob

[andyroo]

If you've spoken to vegetarians like in the quote above - that's because that person is a dick, not because they're a vegetarian (And before anyone says it, no it's not the same thing).

You were still talking complete shite about plants feeling pain - that's the exact same crap I would expect from some hippy vegan nob

Thats what I tried to differentiate in my post above; vegetarians that are decent people I probably wouldnt know are vegetarians (they have no reason to tell me), but the ones that harp on about it are the ones that give over the impression that quite a few people have of them.

Do you not eat meat because you don't like it? Or do you feel guilty?

What I'm getting at about plants feeling pain is that pain is just a form of communication from your body to make you react quickly, there is no reason that plants do not experience a similar type of reaction. Just becasue we can't relate to it doesn't mean it isn't there! And even if plants don't feel pain; neither do animals when they are killed under EU law, and both plant and animal were once living, so in principle killing either is one and the same? And I don't have a problem with either!

How can you say plants don't feel pain? Can't you hear them screaming?

[Tomm]

How can you say plants don't feel pain? Can't you hear them screaming?

I'm sorry but you're talking crap. Show me one bit of evidence suggest that plants can feel pain like we can.

To feel pain you need to

a) have a nervous system

have a memory so you that remember that 2 seconds ago you were in pain (otherwise who cares?)

c) know what pain is and why we are feeling it - I.e. some comprehension that the feeling 'pain' is bad.

Plants don't have any of these things. Fish don't have the second two, so I don't feel too bad about eating them, either.

[1a2bcio8]

I've heard that the latest research is suggestive of plants feeling some form of pain. It makes evolutionary sense. I'm sure situations arise in a plants environment whereby the avoidance of pain (the direction is grows?) may ultimately save a plants life. It must be a very difficult thing to know though.

It's interesting the way in which people lack empathy toward other people. There doesn't seem to be much attempt to understand the situation from another point of view (the Hindu's view). I think that the monks in consideration have a large emotional investment in that cow, arising from their culture/religion (in the same way all of you have strong emotional investments conditioned by your own culture). Nobody really seems to be considering this. Instead the prevailing behavior is for the monks to be lumped under the label, 'religion' and dealt with accordingly. The problem with this is the prejudice that is common to such a label (especially from atheists - ironically the other religion of belief) and the way in which that label stops people evaluating something as it is, separate to other things that also fall under the same label.

You're all involved in some kind of religion (the collective belief in some set of ideas). It just so happens that your religion is your culture or country, and your god is the law. That sounds like fun

Regarding the vegetarianism, as Tomm says, I usually receive less respect than I do negative judgment. As far as I'm concerned, other people can eat meat. If it suits them to do so, I would encourage them. We're all individuals that require different things. Some people require meat, some people don't.

I'm sorry but you're talking crap. Show me one bit of evidence suggest that plants can feel pain like we can.

To feel pain you need to

a) have a nervous system

have a memory so you that remember that 2 seconds ago you were in pain (otherwise who cares?)

c) know what pain is and why we are feeling it - I.e. some comprehension that the feeling 'pain' is bad.

Plants don't have any of these things. Fish don't have the second two, so I don't feel too bad about eating them, either.

Tomm, I think you're being anthropomorphic. I don't think that you would necessarily need a nervous system to experience some form of pain. That's seems to me a big assumption. Additionally you don't need to remember pain for it to be useful, it can be used for homeostasis (the pain remains until a behavior occurs that removes the pain). Finally, in what sense do you mean comprehension? The plant must surely be comprehending, in some sense, the instructions that cause its construction or development? Some kind of communication is intrinsically necessary for a plant to exist in the way that it does. Can pain not be a part of this mechanism? What if you think of it's pain as different to that of human pain? Also, I think it's worth considering the concept of synergy in this regard. A plant may seem incapable, based on the way it looks, of experiencing pain but it says nothing of what occurs through the sum total of its parts. Much like the way, in humans, the mind is an additional product (despite the fact we can't find it yet) of the biological parts that underpin it.

Perhaps I'm being anthropomorphic

[zoo]

Oh my f**king god the thing is dead,this topic should follow suit.

Make a new topic arguing whether or not plants feel pain/cry over how terrible the world is perhaps?

Edited August 6, 2007 by zoo

[Tomm]

But without comprehension, pain is just a reaction - part of homeostasis as you say, in the same we we release hormones or digestive juices. It's not an unpleasant thing (in fact we don't realise it's happening). Pain is different for humans. Although maybe I'm using the wrong word - Perhaps 'hurt' would be better. It's impossible for a plant to feel hurt for the three reasons I stated above.

Oh my f**king god the thing is dead,this topic should follow suit.

Make a new topic arguing whether or not plants feel pain/cry over how terrible the world is perhaps?

Or we could just discuss it in this topic and you could keep your unwanted opinions to yourself, and stay out of this thread?

[andyroo]

I'm sorry but you're talking crap. Show me one bit of evidence suggest that plants can feel pain like we can.

To feel pain you need to

a) have a nervous system

have a memory so you that remember that 2 seconds ago you were in pain (otherwise who cares?)

c) know what pain is and why we are feeling it - I.e. some comprehension that the feeling 'pain' is bad.

Plants don't have any of these things. Fish don't have the second two, so I don't feel too bad about eating them, either.

On your point B, an animal being slaughtered for meat does remember (or even experience) any pain involved with its demise. So why should the eating of it be shrouded with guilt? And with C, the whole point of pain is so that we know that it is 'bad'; if pain felt good we wouldn't try to stop it happening. It is a trigger mechanism to prevent injury. Plants have similar reactive defenses, triggered by a desire to survive. In an example that we can relate to most, one particular plant will curl up into a ball if you touch it. This reaction occurs to prevent damage. The communication from the tip of the leaf to the mechanism that in turn curls the leaf up would, by definition, be called 'pain'.

-

Zoo; are you 12?

[zoo]

12 and 3 quarters actually

[Tomm]

why should the eating of it be shrouded with guilt?

Where are you reading this from?

[1a2bcio8]

But without comprehension, pain is just a reaction - part of homeostasis as you say, in the same we we release hormones or digestive juices. It's not an unpleasant thing (in fact we don't realise it's happening). Pain is different for humans. Although maybe I'm using the wrong word - Perhaps 'hurt' would be better. It's impossible for a plant to feel hurt for the three reasons I stated above.

Ok, I see what you're saying. Pain or 'hurt' is actually a reaction to a reaction; in humans, an emotional (albeit, probably another physiological condition) response to a, physiological (nociceptive as an example) condition?

This is interesting because what you're saying highlights the fact that we give meaning to experience. We create pain from what is, in itself, just experience, or material (biochemical) interaction. This is what the mystical religions always ramble on about (including Hinduism).

I'm still not able to completely rule out that through some kind of synergy, a plant may not be able to react to a physiological condition. That perhaps, in some sense, a plant has a mind of some kind. This may seem far out but to quote Shakespeare, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy". Your reasoning has strongly moved my opinion in your direction but I can still see the potential for a differing actuality.

On your point B, an animal being slaughtered for meat does remember (or even experience) any pain involved with its demise. So why should the eating of it be shrouded with guilt? And with C, the whole point of pain is so that we know that it is 'bad'; if pain felt good we wouldn't try to stop it happening. It is a trigger mechanism to prevent injury. Plants have similar reactive defenses, triggered by a desire to survive. In an example that we can relate to most, one particular plant will curl up into a ball if you touch it. This reaction occurs to prevent damage. The communication from the tip of the leaf to the mechanism that in turn curls the leaf up would, by definition, be called 'pain'.

-

Zoo; are you 12?

When you say about knowing something is 'bad', I think you're missing Tomm's point. He's basically saying, I think, that there exists no biological structure to identify something as bad. in the sense that you can program a robot to react to things without a perception of good or bad. It's the same with the idea of 'desire'. Pure mechanics basically. When you're talking about bad, you're actually projecting your human capacity of perceiving things as 'bad' onto a plant. So easily done In a similar sense, we always project our own egos onto everyone else's within the human realm, assuming that we think and feel the same way.

Edited August 6, 2007 by rowly

[Tomm]

I'm still not able to completely rule out that through some kind of synergy, a plant may not be able to react to a physiological condition.

You can never rule anything out in science, though. Scientific research is all based on the probability that you find your results due to chance - if that probability is less than 0.05 or 1/20 (A completely abitrary threshold) then something is 'significant'. There is no proof, just likelihood. It's all conjecture and creating models that fit best. Plants feeling pain (or perhaps I should say hurt) is extremely unlikely, so unlikely that I wouldn't worry about it. Similarly I don't imagine that rocks feel love or that water gets angry. I don't really see a way you could prove it, though.

No animal life could exist without eating plant life though. Therefore if you believe in God/a god and you believe that we are meant to be on this earth, you can't possibly object to eating plants. If plants do feel pain then we must suppose that they are less worthy of life than us and we're 'allowed' to cause them pain by eating them.

Your thoughts on things usually do interest me, Rowly. Post more

[Rebelistic]

Rebelistic; you think life in the wild compared to life under organic EU law is better? Most farm animals (pigs, cows, sheep, chickens) do not have the capability to survive on their own in the wild in this country! Anyway, what wild? I'd like to see this 'wild' you refer to, becasue I'm sure I could make a mint rearing sheep on it! Truely wild animals are always, starving, close to death, and in constant danger, with no consistent food or water source. Its like comparing homelessness to posh country living.

The farm animals you refer to have been selectivley bread for for along time and have become domesticated and so would struggle to survive in this country - that is true. These animals do have wild 'versions' (pig = wild boar etc.) and these are better suited for survival.

I dissagree that wild animal are always starving & close to death etc. in some places where humans have not destroyed the environment wild animals appear to live in some kind of balance. Yes there lives are risky and dangerous but if I was a non-human animal I would rather be a wild animal in a natural place where there is a chance of survival than on a farm where slaughter is inevitable, even if life was easier untill that point.

You were still talking complete shite about plants feeling pain - that's the exact same crap I would expect from some hippy vegan nob

As a Vegan I find that slightly offensive.

I'm sorry but you're talking crap. Show me one bit of evidence suggest that plants can feel pain like we can.

To feel pain you need to

a) have a nervous system

have a memory so you that remember that 2 seconds ago you were in pain (otherwise who cares?)

c) know what pain is and why we are feeling it - I.e. some comprehension that the feeling 'pain' is bad.

Plants don't have any of these things. Fish don't have the second two, so I don't feel too bad about eating them, either.

I don't know but in some cases pain may be easier to bear if you do understand it

(for example going to the vet may be a lot more stressful for a dog than going to a doctor for a human because the human can understand what is going on and the dog can't so it has more fear)

What he said.

That's a very interesting post. When I said that it would be cruel to kill the bull, I was partly refering to the monks who would be caused pain by loosing an animal that they care about.

I doubt that plants feel pain like humans (and similar animals) do because they do not have central nervous systems however I do not know. I'm fairly sure that mammals like pigs do experience pain in a similar way to humans although what their mental perception of this pain is, is impossible to tell - so to be on the safe side I wouldn't do anything to harm them. I have little choice but to eat plants.

Or we could just discuss it in this topic and you could keep your unwanted opinions to yourself, and stay out of this thread?

Agreed!

On your point B, an animal being slaughtered for meat does remember (or even experience) any pain involved with its demise. So why should the eating of it be shrouded with guilt? And with C, the whole point of pain is so that we know that it is 'bad'; if pain felt good we wouldn't try to stop it happening. It is a trigger mechanism to prevent injury. Plants have similar reactive defenses, triggered by a desire to survive. In an example that we can relate to most, one particular plant will curl up into a ball if you touch it. This reaction occurs to prevent damage. The communication from the tip of the leaf to the mechanism that in turn curls the leaf up would, by definition, be called 'pain'.

I guess you mean 'does not remember'

I think that farm animals often do experience pain when they are killed - at the very least there are lots of very dodgy things going on like live exports.

When humans are using non-human animals to make money then I expect that corners are cut and animal welfare can be neglected - They animals can't exactly complain about it.

I think that most humans feel that humans are superior to all other animals - a sort of culture of 'we are not animals' when infact humans are animals themselves. This is supported by some religions like Christianity where as religions like Hinduism and Buddism see humans and non-human animals as more similar.

I hope this makes sense - a bit of a rant I know

Edited August 6, 2007 by Rebelistic

[Tomm]

As a Vegan I find that slightly offensive.

Sorry, it wasn't aimed at you or anyone in particular - I have nothing against Vegans or Hippies. Nobs I don't like, but I don't think you're a nob

[1a2bcio8]

You can never rule anything out in science, though. Scientific research is all based on the probability that you find your results due to chance - if that probability is less than 0.05 or 1/20 (A completely abitrary threshold) then something is 'significant'. There is no proof, just likelihood. It's all conjecture and creating models that fit best. Plants feeling pain (or perhaps I should say hurt) is extremely unlikely, so unlikely that I wouldn't worry about it. Similarly I don't imagine that rocks feel love or that water gets angry. I don't really see a way you could prove it, though.

No animal life could exist without eating plant life though. Therefore if you believe in God/a god and you believe that we are meant to be on this earth, you can't possibly object to eating plants. If plants do feel pain then we must suppose that they are less worthy of life than us and we're 'allowed' to cause them pain by eating them.

Your thoughts on things usually do interest me, Rowly. Post more

Thank you Tomm, same to you

I agree with your description of scientific understanding and it's limits. That's why I'm a model agnostic. I think though that a lot of people perceive science as something absolute, that transcends the limits of human perception allowing us to definitely understand the universe's governing rules. Science is another god in contemporary, social religion. However, you only have to consider the occurrence of paradigm shifts across our history (the largest experiment yet) to know that what seems definitely correct now is likely to be found as incorrect in some sense or degree at a later point in time. That is, if we apply the same method of science to our records of history (accepting the intrinsic difficulties with historical data).

Additionally it's important to consider that science is a human construction, used by fallible humans. It's inevitably open to human prejudice (desire) which can enslave rational thought (rationalization) for it's own purposes. This is obvious when looking at the differing scientific factions within any area of science. How many of them have a vested interest in their position? (financial, social position, etc.). This is why I practice the sciences of mind such as yoga and Buddhism, so that I might understand when I'm being influenced by such bio-programming.

Interestingly, in regards to your statement about having to eat plants, adept Yogis (of the very rare kind) claim the ability to live off just oxygen. I think that I can imagine individuals with such control over and efficiency in action of themselves that they might only require minimal amounts of energy. However, they also claim to receive most of their energy from something called 'prana', which means 'vital force'; the idea being that there are differing levels of existence or being that converge over a spectrum which most of us are unaware of. They also claim plants as being sentient, albeit to a lesser degree than humans. The yogic justification for eating plants is that they are mostly a necessity for the survival of higher beings (humans, etc.) and it is better to eat that which is harmed less (as opposed to animals). Maybe nonsense, maybe not

[andyroo]

Where are you reading this from?

You never did say why you don't eat meat?

At the core of it, pain is a chemical reaction, a natural instinct to protect our body. For example, if you put your hand on something hot, you will struggle not to involuntarily pull it away. And if you try and hold your breath to kill yourself, your body will knock you unconcious, almost set itself to 'autopilot'. What we experience as pain is little more than the same chemical reaction that causes a plant to react to its surroundings; but, humans having significantly greater adaptation and the ability to learn, and can go on to asscociate other reations alongside the rudimentary reactions i.e: anger often resides alongside pain, a new chemical reation tagged to memories that can be asociated with the casue of the pain. What humans also describe as 'emotional pain' is somewhat different to conventional pain. It does not trigger any subliminal defence mechanisms and is therefore not pain as we describe it here. In the same vein, feelings of love, hatred etc are not on the same level as pain. Pain is very basic, love very complex. We can inderstand why our bodies experience pain; to protect itself, but we cannot understand why we feel love or hate.

Being that pain is such a basic and rudimentary experience, there is every reason why a plant should also use it as a sensor to its surroundings. What we are veering onto here becomes more of a moral issue than a scientific issue; at what point does something alive become more than alive? When does it become something that a veggie wont eat? What is that boundary? If a plant is as alive as an animal, yet due to a plants lesser conscious is treated with less dignity than an animal, how far does this perception stretch? Is someone with downs syndrome less of a human? Technically yes; morally no. So morally, a vegetarian should not eat vegeatables either.

[Rebelistic]

Andyroo,

That's an interesting point about the person with downs syndrome. I don't quite understand what you mean by 'Technically yes; morally no'

I try to base my moral ideas on the technical. I think that's maybe a moral error in our society that a human is given status higher than any animal simply because they are human regardless of the intelligence or ability to feel pain of the human. ie. it seems that a brain dead human is given a higher status than a healthy chinpanzee - many people would be offended at the very idea of compareing a human to an animal.

Sorry, it wasn't aimed at you or anyone in particular - I have nothing against Vegans or Hippies. Nobs I don't like, but I don't think you're a nob

Thanks that's very nice of you! No hard feelings

Rowly,

Do you know of any studies done on the adept Yogis - I've heard that NASA did some experiments with them?

Cheers

[poopipe]

If a plant is as alive as an animal, yet due to a plants lesser conscious is treated with less dignity than an animal, how far does this perception stretch?

I dunno about you lot but I have nothing against the idea of eating the thick.

anyway.

poor bull, he looked very friendly. He did have to go though

[andyroo]

Andyroo,

That's an interesting point about the person with downs syndrome. I don't quite understand what you mean by 'Technically yes; morally no'

I mean that, yes, from a cold, number-crunching perspective, a person with downs syndrom is obviously less 'human' than a fully able person, but morally, no; they are just as equal and should be treated with as much respect as their fellow man. What I was getting at was: Where is the boundary before something is no longer considered 'alive enough' and can therefore be killed without moral objection? Just being alive is not a good enough divide; plants are alive and it is difficult to feel morally wrong about snapping a twig. Adaptation and learning? Plants adapt and learn and evolve over time, so again, not good enough. The pain thing has been discussed, pain is simply a subconcious mechanism, utilised by all living things. (To be honest, pain is one of the last things that would be used to differentiate intelligent life from non intelligent; bacterium react to harmful situations, a reaction that would be triggered by stimuli; that stimuli being whta we call 'pain'.)

This boundary is one of great debate; a very common topic is that of abortion. Is killing a foetus murder? Like the plant, it displays a variety of properties that, on paper, would be indiscernable from a fully grown adult, yet a moral decision has been generally made, again like with plants, that a foetus is not 'alive' enough for it to be taken in the same vain as a fully grown adult.