(June 19, 2010 at 7:39 pm)Saerules Wrote: The question then rather becomes "How much would be enough?" ^_^
I think we know enough on the subject to make some loose preliminary judgements... but ultimately the debate of "what does a thing's ability to feel pain matter?" remains outside the bounds of any scientific evidence (though the question of "if ___ amount of ability to feel pain changes how we use it... then how much does ____ feel?" is directly affected by science) and is entirely philosophical as far as I see ^_^
My point...Sae.
To use the argument that the 'entity' / creature "feels pain" is ambiguous as the scientific evidence is not enough and the emotional evidence would include 'entities' such as plants or foetuses (or Rocks - for the geoscientists and Bacteria- for the microbiologists) is far too emotional and can extend to include all of creation to the point that humans would be unable to live or breathe sans violating the 'Thou shalt not kill' commandment or just the simple ethical premise of living a 'conscious life'
"The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." G'Kar-B5
