vegans be like "i am morally praiseworthy for only exploiting and killing other living things for my benefit if they are sufficiently unlike me that i cannot relate to them emotionally, which makes me different from meat eaters with a cannibalism taboo in kind not degree"
-
-
popularly the word is used as if it meant what "sapient" means, but let's not feed into nonsense
-
i don't believe that's true. popular understandings of sapience has to do with sophisticated congition, whereas sentience has to do with being a subject of experience
-
plants do not have brains and are not subjects of experience. they do not have sensory experience. they might have 'senses' in a limit sense but that's not to do with sentience
-
meh, brainolatry. we have no idea what makes a structure able to support a subject of experience and presuming the capacity comes from our magic brains is just chauvinism.
-
just look at this way: there is overwhelming evidence to believe humans and animals are sentient, where plants *might* be sentient but we have no mechanism to describe and therefore it seems less likely at this point
-
there's no actual evidence that any other human is a subject of experience. most of you claim you are, but that's just what a p-zombie would say, isn't it? animals don't even make the claim
-
if you invoke the problem of other minds and have no answer for it, then sure, but that's just as relevant as invoking the problem of other minds to defend an industry that tortures human-beings
-
which is to say, it isn't relevant. putting aside the problem of other minds, we have every reason to believe animals are sentient just like us, but no reason to believe that plants are
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.