Letters to the Editor
Xanthro
Published Letters: 522 Editor's Choice: 47
-
Suffering should never be alleviated
[Read the article: The practical ethicist]
[Read more letters about this article: Here][i]I don't know that anyone would have a good argument against the alleviation of suffering; no one would say that suffering should continue.[/i]
That's right, suffering should continue and should never be alleviated. The reasons are manyfold, but the most important is that suffering itself is personally subjective.
Too many people confuse needless suffering or intentional infliction of suffering with suffering as a whole.
A lost love is suffering, whether that person dies or leaves. Hence the phrase, "Better to have loved and lost than never love'd at all."
When my grandfather died I was miserable for years, my suffering would have been less had I not loved him so much, but feelings and caring is part of human nature.
I can hear the arguments now, but that's not the kind of suffering we are talking about. That's the problem, suffering cannot be defined to the satisfication of most, much less everyone.
Suffering drives humanity forward, while both good and evil are done in the name of reducing suffering, without "suffering" humanity stagnates to a meaningless existence.
Imagine literature and art without suffering. It doesn't exist as we know it, because the concept of suffering is linked with empathy. Without empathy there is no art, there is no literature, there is meaningless drawings and empty words on paper.
This doesn't mean we should try to harm others, or enjoy their torments, or not try to reduce misery in the world, but our definition of suffering is going to change, and it cannot nor should not be eliminated.
-
Animal Torture
[Read the article: The practical ethicist]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Is it wrong to torture animals?"
That is dependent on culture. Some cultures believe it is important to torture animals. Some because they think that agony makes for more tender meat, others because it appeases the gods.
"Everyone agrees that it's wrong to torture animals, "
Not only does everyone not agree on this, see the above, the very debate is over just what is animal torture.
Does throwing a chicken in a wood chipper equal torture. How about shocking them unconcious, then killing them. People will spend their lives trying to define what is and what is not torture for an animal.
"but what exactly is the difference -- for people without unique health requirements that necessitate eating meat -- between torturing animals for pleasure and eating animals for pleasure?"
Pleasure has little to do with it and trying to equate infliction of pain for enjoyment and eating is dishones. Animals are meant to be eaten. That is a simple fact. Many are literally eaten alive, torn to shreds by wolves, lions and other predators. Others are eaten after they die, but at some level all animals are consumed by other animals.
Most people frown upon inflicting unnecessary pain on an animal because people understand that those that enjoy inflicting pain on animals probably enjoy inflicting pain on humans as well.
"Is the difference a matter of degree -- no one can possibly enjoy torturing a pig as much as I enjoy a ham sandwich, and a pig doesn't suffer from being made into a ham sandwich nearly as much as it suffers from being tortured?"
Degree doesn't matter because you are linking unlike items.
Pigs in an indigenous will rarely die of old age or some other painless death. Predators will kill and eat the pig at some point as the pig weakens with age. That's how nature works, and humans are a part of nature.
A wolf killing a pig isn't doing so because it hates the pig, or wants the pig to suffer, but because the pig tastes good. Many of us eat pigs for the same reason. Like the wolf, we shouldn't inflict pain on the pig for the pains sake.
"People are more important than animals. Absolutely. But people are not so much more important than animals that people should eat animals because they're more tasty -- that is, more fun to eat -- than beans."
You are entitled to your opinion, and if you chose to eat beans rather than meat, that is your personal choice. However, your personal choices have no value to the choices of others except as an example.
-
The other other white meat.
[Read the article: The practical ethicist]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"people are made of meat, too."
Humm, the other other white meat.
Actually, it's an old joke, "If God didn't want us to eat animals, then why'd he make them out of meat."