If cattle/livestock were sentient would you still eat them?

[astroturfing]

i suspect cows are just as sentient as we are, just not as intelligent (duh). hell, they might be even MORE sentient than us, living more in the moment and purely focused on what is happening right there and then to them, unable to console themselves that tomorrow may be better, like we humans can do...

but anyway someone else murders them for me, so i still pick up meat products from the supermarket. i could never ever kill a cow myself, but i'll probably only stop when it becomes illegal, the taste of meat is just too addicting. and i'm weak.

 

[The Albatross]

Sentient is a word I'm struggling with here.

I dunno what id do. If Cows were like humans then probably not. But I like how someone said on page 1 that food is basically religion, and I don't think it's a coincidence that nearly all major religions over the last billion years also tend to adopt or impose some food restrictions. There's some sort of ethical or moral dilemma that we, as evolved species, feel when we eat... Anything. Like, I don't think my dog moralizes about food. So there's something about intelligence and food that makes people over many millennia take pause and adopt rules, either for rational (say, foods that more often led to sickness or something being considered "unclean" and then rules around that being given from God) or super rational reasons.

So in a wacky world where cows live in polite society it's hard to say how that changes anything, it's hard to predict, but going out on a limb I think I wouldn't.

Also would the cows feel guilty about eating grass? Might these super rational cows know or believe something about grass that we don't?

 

[SweetBellic]

Voted yes because cows are already sentient lol

If they were sapient, then yeah, I'd probably stop eating beef.

 

[Good_Day!]

Again if it is natural then why can't our bodies breakdown cholesterol in the same way that carnivores can even as omnivores? Instead, we end up with build up in arteries which leads to heart conditions.

All you're doing is repeating the same thing without offering an argument against blood chemistry and metabolic functioning.

Click to shrink...

It's hard to tell if you're serious or not. We don't break down cholesterol into waste. Cholesterol is vital to us. It's used in every cell membrane in your body and to create hormones. Your liver produces it to make sure you have enough.

 

[RadzPrower]

Wow...I expected to come in and straightaway say "No", but I've seen a couple of posts that put my mind in a place where I'm not so sure anymore.

See, we already have been eating them, so in a sense, there's no change there other than the knowledge that this creature knew it was alive.

If they've become sentient though, suddenly we're competing with them for resources and what does that conflict look like? Like, does it come down to a point where it's us or them and we're basically going to war with them and killing them anyhow? Might as well eat them again if we are, maybe?

Do we make a sick deal with them where they have enacted some sort of racist policy that considers some among them less than the others and they're willing to trade them to us to eat? How does that reflect on us as humanity if we'd be willing to accept those terms?

I'm still leaning "No", but there could be some weird "what if" scenarios to pull out of such a simple concept.

 

[thediamondage]

i'd eat more meat if cows, pigs, and chickens would go full on rebellion mode, took up arms against people and starting hunting and eating us. it'd feel super fair to go out and hunt and kill your own food. everyone would go around with a gun and maybe societys problems would be solved if we all banded together against animal overlords

we'd be super screwed though if bugs got super sapient and intelligent

 

[inner-G]

i'd eat more meat if cows, pigs, and chickens would go full on rebellion mode

Click to shrink...

 

[MegaManTrigger]

It's hard to tell if you're serious or not. We don't break down cholesterol into waste. Cholesterol is vital to us. It's used in every cell membrane in your body and to create hormones. Your liver produces it to make sure you have enough.

Click to shrink...

Not sure why you're implicating that I'm not being serious when this is backed by science. Again, you're shifting the goalpost and talking about cholesterol being used when you missed one key detail; Dietary cholesterol is not that significant for the human body's production for hormones, cell membranes, and various other components. In fact, it only amounts to 10%-20% of production. As you mentioned, we already produce these things on our own (roughly 80-90%).
Otherwise by your logic, if you had high serum cholesterol as a result of excess meat/fat diet, then you should never have any risk of atherosclerosis because your body would have been able to make use of all of that.

 

[Good_Day!]

Not sure why you're implicating that I'm not being serious when this is backed by science. Again, you're shifting the goalpost and talking about cholesterol being used when you missed one key detail; Dietary cholesterol is not that significant for the human body's production for hormones, cell membranes, and various other components. In fact, it only amounts to 10%-20% of production. As you mentioned, we already produce these things on our own (roughly 80-90%).
Otherwise by your logic, if you had high serum cholesterol as a result of excess meat/fat diet, then you should never have any risk of atherosclerosis because your body would have been able to make use of all of that.

Click to shrink...

I'm shifting goalposts? You started off stating humans were not designed to eat meat. We can't break down cholesterol. Cholesterol in meat is good cholesterol. This is like claiming the earth is flat or animals can talk and stuff. Our evolution has depended in large part on our ability to consume meat. It's what separated us from our primate relatives.

 

[MegaManTrigger]

I'm shifting goalposts? You started off stating humans were not designed to eat meat. We can't break down cholesterol. Cholesterol in meat is good cholesterol. This is like claiming the earth is flat or animals can talk and stuff. Our evolution has depended in large part on our ability to consume meat. It's what separated us from our primate relatives.

Click to shrink...

I never said that humans weren't designed to eat meat, I argued against the person saying that eating meat is "natural" when the metabolic functions to break down cholesterol is way more inefficient for humans than for carnivores.

Also why are you making baseless claims? We have over 50 years of data showing that eating meat contributes to LDL build-up. HDL is found in olive oil, avocado, certain fish, beans and legumes to name a few. And you have the audacity to compare that to saying the earth is flat when you clearly exposed that you know nothing about LDL and HDL sources.

 

[Legend of Aims]

Not at all.
As long as fish remain as they are.

How can you eat something that talks back to you?

 

[JackSwift]

Depends which way they vote

 

[ɣGammaɣ]

They are, so sure.

If we are talking spaient, the question is interesting but also, most common livestock isn't actually able to live/survive outside of captivity. The same is true for crops and most other things we farm.

They survive because we raise them to feed ourselves.

Click to shrink...

Thats not true, livestock is very much capable to survive without humans and they behave pretty much as their wild counterparts. There were studies with pigs in the UK and Cattle in the Netherlands. Also for crops its not true, may I ask why do you think it is?

Edit: The study in the Netherlands had to be stopped because of worried people btw.

 

[Deleted member 8257]

By sentient did you mean if the animal could reason with us? Like chicken asking me and pleading it's case? Then no, I will not eat meat.

 

[AGoodODST]

I mean yeah, we already do since most/all animals are?

I'm assuming you mean sapient though haha

 

[The Adder]

I don't even eat them now.

Dietary health reasons aside, I can't eat anything I've seen play fetch.

Which means you're still on the menu, venison.

 

[Stranger Things]

Nah, I wouldn't eat anything that is close to human intelligence, if that's what "sentience" means in this case. Like would you eat a parrot, a bird that can literally speak English?

Like I wouldn't eat a chimpanzee or a dolphin or an elephant, because I know those creatures are almost as "aware" of reality as we are. Like they are pretty much on the same "wavelength" as humans, it's freaky. If you gave an elephant human hands it would build a time machine or something haha.

But yeah, I think factory farming in general is pretty messed up even with normal cows and chickens, but I grew up in the "culture" of eating meat, so I'm clearly desensitized to the cruelty aspect. I mean, I'm not the one butchering them, I just pick up a few slabs of frozen, packaged "product" from the grocery store.

 

[The Adder]

Nah, I wouldn't eat anything that is close to human intelligence, if that's what "sentience" means in this case. Like would you eat a parrot, a bird that can literally speak English?

Like I wouldn't eat a chimpanzee or a dolphin or an elephant, because I know those creatures are almost as "aware" of reality as we are. Like they are pretty much on the same "wavelength" as humans, it's freaky. If you gave an elephant human hands it would build a time machine or something haha.

Click to shrink...

I got bad news for you about pork...

 

[JudgeN]

Yes they taste delicious

 

[Rotkehle]

Farming plants to eat also causes environmental issues and climate change, but I don't see anyone up in arms about that lol.

Click to shrink...

oh wow, please show US the numbers of both in comparison. PLEASE

 

[elLOaSTy]

Cattle are sentient (able to perceive and feel things), which is one of the reasons I don't eat them.

Click to shrink...

Yeah people act like they don't have emotions but they are very mcuh aware of how awful their lives are. Just because they can't speak and communicate with us to a certain standard doesn't lessen their awareness of their life.

 

[Patapuf]

Thats not true, livestock is very much capable to survive without humans and they behave pretty much as their wild counterparts. There were studies with pigs in the UK and Cattle in the Netherlands. Also for crops its not true, may I ask why do you think it is?

Edit: The study in the Netherlands had to be stopped because of worried people btw.

Click to shrink...

The reason is similar for both: they require way more food than wild plants/animals and would eventually be displaced by them. Especially in the case of modern crops.

Livestock is capable of surviving but not anywhere near at the current population levels and again, way less adapted to fight off predators and such (though central europe isn't exactly bustling with them nowadays). One can just compare how domesticated cows look even just 100-150 years ago to now.

I'm not talking like they'd disapear within a day and one can certainly argue about the differences between wild and domesticated.

 

[inner-G]

oh wow, please show US the numbers of both in comparison. PLEASE

Click to shrink...

I don't know where you would get those hard numbers, but it would be hard to argue that neither contribute to climate change.

Nutrient runoff has lots of impact both locally (algae blooms, toxic drainage) and globally (ocean acidification).

What is Ocean Acidification

What is ocean acidification? Ocean acidification occurs when our ocean absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, causing a fundamental and global change in the ocean's chemistry.

oceanacidification.noaa.gov

 

[Dice]

[/QUOTE]

Honestly, If I had to kill my own food I would be a vegan.

Click to shrink...

Right? :S

What's this from? It looks like Bojack but I don't remember it in there.

Click to shrink...

It's Bojack!

 

[kmfdmpig]

It's Bojack!

Click to shrink...

Thanks! What a top-tier show.
This was funniest timing. I finally got so curious that two minutes ago I changed some browser settings to enable Google search and found that it was indeed Bojack. If I had been patient my laziness would have paid off.

 

[Rotkehle]

I don't know where you would get those hard numbers, but it would be hard to argue that neither contribute to climate change.

Nutrient runoff has lots of impact both locally (algae blooms, toxic drainage) and globally (ocean acidification).

What is Ocean Acidification

What is ocean acidification? Ocean acidification occurs when our ocean absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, causing a fundamental and global change in the ocean's chemistry.

oceanacidification.noaa.gov

Click to shrink...

We know how much CO2 equivalent meet needs especially with the highe amount of feed those animals need. We also know how much CO2 equivalent a non carnivore life style would be.
50% lower and significantly less problems you mentioned.
it's not that I'm promoting a plant only diet. But you don't have ignore the numbers just to defend your diet.

 

[LumberPanda]

Yes animals feel pain, no we don't eat too much meat, no there aren't very many decent meat alternatives.

Eating humans is culturally immoral, but not unnatural. Cannabilism exists in nature.

Farming plants to eat also causes environmental issues and climate change, but I don't see anyone up in arms about that lol. It's because they care more about attempting to demonize omnivores than trying to actually fix environmental problems.

Click to shrink...

If you want to reduce the total amount of plant farming, to reduce plant farming runoff, then the best influence you can have would be to stop eating meat - since that's a far larger usage of plant farms than if it went directly to humans.

"Weird how people aren't up in arms about the solution", IKR?

I don't know where you would get those hard numbers, but it would be hard to argue that neither contribute to climate change.

Nutrient runoff has lots of impact both locally (algae blooms, toxic drainage) and globally (ocean acidification).

What is Ocean Acidification

What is ocean acidification? Ocean acidification occurs when our ocean absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, causing a fundamental and global change in the ocean's chemistry.

oceanacidification.noaa.gov

Click to shrink...

I took a look at your source. Did you? Because under actionable steps for reducing your carbon footprint, I noticed it specifically says "Reduce your meat and dairy" but not "Reduce plant intake". Given that you source this organization, you trust their assessment that reducing your meat and dairy intake is super important?

 

[smcc94x]

Did you read the last line of my post? "Someone who chooses to eat tofu dog is no different or better than someone who has a meat dog. They are both just people eating what they want to."

I don't think all people want to live to be 90.

Some of us want to enjoy life while we are here because it is fleeting, and not use our time and energy to be mad at other people for what they eat.

Click to shrink...

As long as you enjoy your life, everyone else and all other creatures that suffer as a consequence of environmental damage and mass farming can get fucked, right?

 

[burnfout]

Don't eat animals and never will ever again.

Going vegan has been the best personal decision I've ever made.

 

[Krauser Kat]

If everyone were vegan, only a quarter of current farmland would be needed

Most is currently used to grow plants to feed animals

www.economist.com

Look at the timing of this article.

If people were vegan 1/2 or 3/4 the time we could save so much of our earth from dumb shit.

 

[ɣGammaɣ]

The reason is similar for both: they require way more food than wild plants/animals and would eventually be displaced by them. Especially in the case of modern crops.

Livestock is capable of surviving but not anywhere near at the current population levels and again, way less adapted to fight off predators and such (though central europe isn't exactly bustling with them nowadays). One can just compare how domesticated cows look even just 100-150 years ago to now.

I'm not talking like they'd disapear within a day and one can certainly argue about the differences between wild and domesticated.

Click to shrink...

Ah ok, could be possible, but till the pressure over resources from other animals would be high enough they probably would survive. Of course in typical sized groups and a few will die because of the weather/winter but overall. They will not require more food, they will just grow a lot slower. First generation will have it harder because of damage they got from the farm like way to big udder - problems in movement, but the next gen will be good. Anyway, domesticated animals don't rely on humans and can survive.
Have a look here, these are somewhat still wild cattle. (Not to proof a point, maybe you are interested)

Chillingham cattle - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[lint2015]

I guess the real problem is people somehow thinking that cattle and other livestock aren't even sentient.

 

[boi]

Cattle are sentient (able to perceive and feel things), which is one of the reasons I don't eat them.

Click to shrink...

This

 

[Mechaplum]

I don't eat red meat so....

Not to mention that cattle farms are one of the biggest contributors to global warming.

If chickens can talk i'd stop eating them though.