View Single Post
Old 07-01-2006, 06:23 AM   #42
Marc Moffett
Member Marc Moffett is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Laramie  WY
Posts: 141
I always learn a lot on this board. Michael, I did want to say that I have read some of your past posts on this subject and I have always thought you were an articulate and thoughtful apologist for your views. So even if my language was strong (morally repugnant), it wasn't intended to be belittling. In fact, the mere fact that someone is willing to take a stand for animal rights is IMO a solid indication of a strong moral character.

One further point for Doug. There is a good deal of debate concerning at what level in the taxonomic hierarchy sentience begins. Peter Singer in his seminal book "Animal Rights" thought that it was likely that clams and other lower invertebrates did not posses sentience. As I noted, James Rose, thinks this might go all the way to fish. You certainly might consider the possibility that shellfish and crustaceans don't really have the neurological wherewithall to counts as conscious beings. And even if they do have a budding consciousness, they might not have morally relevant types of mental states. Pain is morally relevant; proprioreception, not so clearly. In this event, eating clams and oysters would be no more morally objectionable than eating plants.

And, I hesitate to add, worms and insects might well fall in this category as well. In all honesty, I have been considering the paleo possibilities of the hordes of grasshoppers on my property. Anybody know what their DHA and EPA values are??:wink:
  Reply With Quote