Do fish feel pain?

[The Grand Nudger]

The nociceptor thing is in the against column for most fish. The bony fish have them. OFC....we're -also- a bony fish, taxonomically...

[FlatAssembler]

Pain, as we understand it, isn't basic.  It's a recent acquisition associated with the mammalian cortex.  We can't help but intuit that other creatures feel pain when we see them respond, but at the same time we know that alot of them literally don't have the machinery.  The vast majority of basic responses to harmful things in living creatures (even us) are hard wired or straight up chemical reactions.   The compromise that researchers have landed on is that fish feel something like their own version of pain, distinct from what we mean when we discuss that in human terms.  They possess some of the machinery, but not all, they display some of the associated behaviors, but not all...and "fish" is a pretty broad category, so there are differences between specimens.

I think that it's a good pain avoidance strategy to treat anything you think feels pain as though it does.  That way, even if it doesn't...you wont.

I am not sure this precautionary principle ("In case you are not certain whether something is sentient, treat it as if it is.") works well in politics. Sure, it works in ethics as a way to make the debates about solipsism irrelevant to ethics, but I am not so sure it works in politics. When we say "Fish should be treated as if they felt pain.", we are advocating for coercion. We are saying that fishing ships should somehow be modified to kill the fish humanely, which costs money and, in all likelihood, freedom (as fishers probably need to be forced to do that). One who is advocating for coercion has the burden of proof, doesn't he?
Sure, sometimes coercion is justified, such as regulating the use of antibiotics in the egg industry (as it's basic biology that it causes superbacteria). But coercing people to kill fish humanely even though we aren't certain they feel pain... I am not sure that's justified.

[FlatAssembler]

Yes, they do.

Look up "nociceptors".

You're welcome.

Nociceptors are not enough to feel pain. People with congenital insensitivity to pain also have nociceptors, but they still don't feel pain. Type-c neurofibers appear to also be necessary for pain.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I feel pain just reading this thread. Fish are lucky.

Boru

[arewethereyet]

^Maybe some sesame seeds would help each the pain.

[The Grand Nudger]

I am not sure this precautionary principle ("In case you are not certain whether something is sentient, treat it as if it is.") works well in politics. Sure, it works in ethics as a way to make the debates about solipsism irrelevant to ethics, but I am not so sure it works in politics. When we say "Fish should be treated as if they felt pain.", we are advocating for coercion. We are saying that fishing ships should somehow be modified to kill the fish humanely, which costs money and, in all likelihood, freedom (as fishers probably need to be forced to do that). One who is advocating for coercion has the burden of proof, doesn't he?
Sure, sometimes coercion is justified, such as regulating the use of antibiotics in the egg industry (as it's basic biology that it causes superbacteria). But coercing people to kill fish humanely even though we aren't certain they feel pain... I am not sure that's justified.

Good thing I'm not looking to make my precautionary principles into laws, then, eh?  

I'm of the opinion that the best way to get producers onboard with humane protocols isn't to try to coerce them...either personally or with legislation.  It's to show them how to use those protocols to increase their profit.  In my experience that's worked a whole lot better than any amount of concerned lectures or debates about whether the livestock feel pain. That's only half the struggle, too. Then you have to get the producer and the consumer to interact more closely...because even though the consumer for a niche product is already convince about the thing, they're rarely aware of or initially convinced about the price.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Fish respond to stimuli, reacting as they're wired to react. Same with humans, but we're much more histrionic.

[Jackalope]

Fish respond to stimuli, reacting as they're wired to react. Same with humans, but we're much more histrionic.

Riffing off of this comment.

Yes, humans have more complex "software" and "hardware", to use familiar computing analogies.

It's clear that fish react to stimuli that humans would perceive as painful. It's doubtful (to me) that fish have the same qualitative experience of pain that humans do, but they do have their own experience.

To me, that's why the questions of "what does it mean to feel pain" are crucially important to have any kind of meaningful discussion on the subject without anthropomorphisms.

[Angrboda]

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Would it be better to say "respond to damage to the body"?