The ethics if factory farming

[bennyboy]

The caveat is that we were talking about coyotes 'n' sich, and animals living natural lives. If you want to define humans as animals and say that living in factories is therefore part of natural life, okay. But I don't think it's a good definition.

Why isn't it? If I told you that it was okay to kill livestock but not human beings - that we are somehow special and different and so our suffering matters and theirs does not - you would chide me for drawing a self serving line in the sand, eh? Well, here's your line - are we being consistent?

No. You're not. You haven't demonstrated that humans have any special quality that makes them deserving of special moral consideration or recognition. But I do know of one source which asserts such a special quality-- the Bible. The idea that there is something intrinsically special, in a moral sense, about people is a Biblical one, supported by ideas about the human soul, the will of God, etc., and not supported by any rational ideas about suffering or its relationship to morality.

You can say that bovines are "evolving" to match the "human environment," but while there is some chance involved (meatier bulls being chosen as sires, for example), there's really no chance for the animal to interact meaningfully with its environment.

Their behavior also determines their access to mating opportunity. We want them docile - and we want them to be over-eaters. A beefy, well marbled cow that is a docile eating machine will have progeny almost beyond number.

You're saying what I just said. But that is not a meaningful interaction. Don't believe me? What if aliens had a "herd" of humans, and arbitrarily chose humans based on certain physical or personality traits? Yes, they might choose the healthiest and mate them, or choose less aggressive males based on specific moments of behavior-- but that doesn't mean the animal has any control over its fate. It cannot decide "I want that particular female, and I'm going to fight that particular male to do it," and have any statistical chance to succeed.

This ability to interact with the environment is found on any list of the defining features of life-- therefore if anything is robbed of this ability, it cannot really be said to be living a life. Zombie cows are bad, and creating zombie cows on purpose is pretty evil (and I define evil as anything which corrupts a living organism to the point that it cannot be said to be meaningfully alive).

You don't like their lives - that doesn't mean they aren't living their lives. The buffalo being chased by wolves probably doesn't like it's life either.

I'm not talking about the hedonic state of the animal. I'm talking about the capacity to meaningfully interact with the environment as one of the defining features of life. The buffalo being chased still has a statistical chance of survival. It might be slightly smarter, or slightly tougher, than others, and it has the chance to apply these attributes in a statistical contest against real animals.