• sirdorius@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Let’s say that plants do have some kind of sentience, which is probably very limited due to the evidence we do have. Animals still have more advanced sentience that is closer to our own so it would still be the lesser evil to eat plants. Like why would you eat other people or chimps when there are other options available?

    It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to be able to say that plants suffer the same way as animals. I know you’re not saying this, but you do hear stuff like this based on this premise.

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Measuring levels of sentience in the context of what’s OK to do to it is an extremely dangerous road to be taking that always ends in eugenics.

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          First you say it’s OK to be cruel to one life form because it’s less intelligent, it’s not long before that extends to disabled people. It might sound like hyperbole, but never underestimate the internet’s capacity to steer the ship towards nazi germany when given the chance.

          • sirdorius@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Who said anything about intelligence?

            sentient: capable of sensing or feeling : conscious of or responsive to the sensations of seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, or smelling

            That has nothing to do with being disabled, as people with disabilities still sense the world

    • sqgl@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Check out the Joe Rogan episode with Paul Stamets on how fungi allow trees in a forest to exchange nutrients. Dunno if that is classed as “communication” but it still blew my mind.

      It was the first Rogan episode I saw and the only good one as it turned out.

    • psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      You can’t eat anything in the modern world without killing animals. A combine harvester harvests wheat and mice. A hundred meat eaters are responsible for a single cow death, and the cow lived on marginal land, drinking from streams - you couldn’t grow other food on the land (sure some are grown on perfect fertile land, they don’t need to be)

      Not saying I’m a meat eater, I don’t care about mice, but there’s blood on all our hands

      • chetradley@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        Statistically, that cow had a short and miserable life in a factory farm before being killed at a small fraction of their potential lifespan. They were fed a grain-based diet that caused far more mice deaths than it would have to use the land to grow crops to feed humans directly.

        Even in the situation you’ve presented, which again is an exceedingly small percentage (<10% globally, <1% in the US), land is being used which could be rewilded to promote biodiversity. The cow in question is still contributing to GHG emissions and will again be killed around 16 months of age.

      • Tamo240@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        A quick google gave me

        livestock farming is 2.5 billion hectares, about 50% of the world’s agricultural area and about 20% of the total land on Earth.

        So maybe you should revisit the idea of ‘marginal land’ that ‘couldn’t grow other food’

      • sirdorius@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Of course, but livestock require even more agriculture to maintain than the same caloric/protein intake of plant based. So if the choice is 50 animals or 100 animals then the choice is easy.