738
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

What if it requires 1/1000th the number of animals … but each one suffers a hundred times more?

Would it be worth it?

[-] 0xD@infosec.pub 6 points 1 year ago

How do you quantify suffering?

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

If you don’t have a way of quantifying suffering, perhaps all utilitarian calculus is bunk?

[-] 0xD@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately, I don't really understand your response.

You talked about one hundred times the suffering. What does that mean? To me, the way animals are held in mass production is completely unethical and there is no way to make it worse... So how do you make the animals suffer even more?

[-] nickiwest@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

From a utilitarian perspective, you're still reducing overall suffering by an order of magnitude, so your scenario is still a greater good.

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

This assumes a linear value function of course

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

stem cells can suffer? this isn't cloning an animal, it's cloning certain tissues.

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Hence the word “if” here. A hypothetical scenario.

this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
738 points (98.4% liked)

Futurology

3099 readers
23 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS