Since becoming Vegan, I have regularly had to deal with questions from friends, family and acquaintances. Most of them are genuinely curious to know why?
For example, I was presented to a person by a common friend who was asking me what I would like him to serve me. Before I could answer the common friend said to him, he does not eat meat, cheese, fish so basically only vegetables. The person looked at me and asked if I had a health concern?
The exchange had a tinge of cynical ridicule to it so, laughing, I said, no I am healthy thanks to God, but it is as a precaution.
It is just an example of the common attitude that people have about the issue and quite frankly I can understand that they consider not eating meat out of empathy for animals as being too cute for a serious man. This is especially true in a male dominant society.
So, I start a discussion about pain and suffering. And I ask if they think that the pain and suffering that animals feel is the same as that which human beings feel?
Interestingly there are as many answers to this as there are people. Most do not consider it to be the same. Neither the same in sensual result nor in importance. There are those who consider it to be normal and acceptable. There are those who consider that it is alright for animals but not for humans. There are those who think that animals suffer less and feel it less.
After a few exchanges I found that most end up accepting that the pain felt is probably the same, but the suffering is not because it cannot be the same or equal.
I am personally curious to have more feedback about this question or insight from others.
Is it the same Pain?
- VGnizm
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:31 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Is it the same Pain?
Be Strong Be Vegan !
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
- Lay Vegan
- Senior Member
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:05 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
Pain is commonly described as an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage. How one interprets these unpleasant sensory sensations can be referred to as suffering.
(Most) animals certainly experience pain and suffering. Mammals in particular possess similar centralized nervous systems, neurochemicals, and emotions that humans possess. We know that animals suffer by observing the way an injured dog hops around on 3 legs, whining, and avoiding pressure on his injured paw. Or the way an ill chimp may become socially reclusive and change her eating habits.
But do animals feel the same degree of pain that humans do? Likely not. If different animals could feel pain at similar levels, they would likely require the same level of complex cognitive processes associated with pain and suffering. When nerve signals reach the brain, it is interpreted in quality and intensity, and the range of ability to interpret the unpleasant sensory experience likely varies. Humans are capable of far more emotions than non human animals, like disgust, embarrassment, and pride. The same pin prick in a dog's paw versus a human child's finger could result in the human child suffering more.
Imagine if a mouse and a human simultaneously developed cancer. Would they suffer in the same degree? Of course not. Sure, they may both feel ill or noxious, but a human has a much greater level of awareness of reality, and of the severity of cancer. A human also has a greater anticipation of the future. She may think "What will happen to my children? How will they go on without me?" or "What will my parents think when they bury their own child?" The level of suffering is that much greater for a human. There is a much wider array of emotions for her to experience throughout her battle with cancer.
To answer your question, I think animals possess the same neurological and neurochemical processes to experience pain, but not in the same degree.
(Most) animals certainly experience pain and suffering. Mammals in particular possess similar centralized nervous systems, neurochemicals, and emotions that humans possess. We know that animals suffer by observing the way an injured dog hops around on 3 legs, whining, and avoiding pressure on his injured paw. Or the way an ill chimp may become socially reclusive and change her eating habits.
But do animals feel the same degree of pain that humans do? Likely not. If different animals could feel pain at similar levels, they would likely require the same level of complex cognitive processes associated with pain and suffering. When nerve signals reach the brain, it is interpreted in quality and intensity, and the range of ability to interpret the unpleasant sensory experience likely varies. Humans are capable of far more emotions than non human animals, like disgust, embarrassment, and pride. The same pin prick in a dog's paw versus a human child's finger could result in the human child suffering more.
Imagine if a mouse and a human simultaneously developed cancer. Would they suffer in the same degree? Of course not. Sure, they may both feel ill or noxious, but a human has a much greater level of awareness of reality, and of the severity of cancer. A human also has a greater anticipation of the future. She may think "What will happen to my children? How will they go on without me?" or "What will my parents think when they bury their own child?" The level of suffering is that much greater for a human. There is a much wider array of emotions for her to experience throughout her battle with cancer.
To answer your question, I think animals possess the same neurological and neurochemical processes to experience pain, but not in the same degree.
- VGnizm
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:31 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
So basically suffering is a subjective element that is related to the degree of sentience whereas pain is simply a bio-mechanical process?
If that is the case then can it be argued that if a lesser suffering can alleviate a higher suffering then it is ethical to use it to remedy the other?
What do you think?
If that is the case then can it be argued that if a lesser suffering can alleviate a higher suffering then it is ethical to use it to remedy the other?
What do you think?
Be Strong Be Vegan !
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
- Lay Vegan
- Senior Member
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:05 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
That is how I would define them, yes. If you disagree, I'd like to hear a dissenting viewpoint.
I think that depends on the context. I went to a boarding school for a portion of my life, and all students were required (with parental consent) to receive yearly flu shots. This really distressed and agonized quite a few students. Just the idea of sticking a sharp needle into the soft flesh of their arm was enough to make them cry. One could argue that flu shots caused some suffering to the students. But the suffering caused by a temporary pain in his arm is minute compared the suffering the influenza virus could inflict on him. In this sense, preventing the flu justifies causing some discomfort by administering flu shots to students.
Does this answer your question?
- VGnizm
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:31 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
Yes and no!
I am asking because the prevailing attitude amongst meat eating people is that since the consequence of pain and suffering is much less for animals and since we humans need the benefits of protein contained in meat to be healthy it should be accepted that we consume animals for our well-being.
I am asking because the prevailing attitude amongst meat eating people is that since the consequence of pain and suffering is much less for animals and since we humans need the benefits of protein contained in meat to be healthy it should be accepted that we consume animals for our well-being.
Be Strong Be Vegan !
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
- Lay Vegan
- Senior Member
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:05 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
This argument isn't sound. Humans are not required to consume animal protein to be healthy.VGnizm wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:02 pm I am asking because the prevailing attitude amongst meat eating people is that since the consequence of pain and suffering is much less for animals and since we humans need the benefits of protein contained in meat to be healthy it should be accepted that we consume animals for our well-being.
It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diets are nutritionally adequate and may help to prevent and treat certain diseases. Vegetarian and vegan diets are appropriate for all stages of the life, including pregnancy, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood.
https://www.eatrightpro.org/practice/position-and-practice-papers/position-papers/vegetarian-diets
If someone must consume animals to survive, his actions may be justified. For most of us living in wealthy developed nations, eating animals is not necessary to to stay alive.
- VGnizm
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:31 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
I agree but the argument is not the vital need of animal protein but rather the comparative degree of pain and benefit.
Someone argued to me that meat is important for our health and a chicken does not suffer very much since it is not very evolved. Therefore it does not make sense that i should sacrifice my health benefits for such a reason.
Let's look at it differently. If we assume that plants do feel pain but much less than animals then would it still be justified to use them for nutrition?
And is pain the determining factor or is it suffering, which is more of a subjective issue?
We need to keep in mind that the majority population does not look at things philosophically but rather in simple terms. So what type of response would refute their reasoning?
Someone argued to me that meat is important for our health and a chicken does not suffer very much since it is not very evolved. Therefore it does not make sense that i should sacrifice my health benefits for such a reason.
Let's look at it differently. If we assume that plants do feel pain but much less than animals then would it still be justified to use them for nutrition?
And is pain the determining factor or is it suffering, which is more of a subjective issue?
We need to keep in mind that the majority population does not look at things philosophically but rather in simple terms. So what type of response would refute their reasoning?
Be Strong Be Vegan !
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
Life Loving Foods™ ! - https://www.LifeLovingFoods.com/index.php
Life Loving Foods™ - Twitter! - https://twitter.com/LifeLovingFoods
- Lay Vegan
- Senior Member
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:05 pm
- Diet: Vegan
Re: Is it the same Pain?
If an action causes suffering and can be avoided, it should be avoided. Eating chicken is not necessarily important for human health. Protein, phosphorous, zinc, B12, and vitamin A can be absorbed from more ethical sources that require significantly less suffering. By opting for black beans, lentils, legumes, and B12 supplements over chicken, you are not sacrificing health benefits for the well-being of another. Sure you're sacrificing taste pleasure and tradition, but neither of these matter more than the suffering of another.VGnizm wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:00 pm I agree but the argument is not the vital need of animal protein but rather the comparative degree of pain and benefit.
Someone argued to me that meat is important for our health and a chicken does not suffer very much since it is not very evolved. Therefore it does not make sense that i should sacrifice my health benefits for such a reason.
Yes. Any consistent person should respect the spectrum of sentience. If plants could suffer to some extent, but not at level of a non human animal, we would be forced to continue eating them for mere survival. Starving ourselves for plant well-being wouldn't be rational, because our level of suffering would be far greater than theirs. Overall, the least amount of harm would be achieved by humans consuming sentient plants for mere survival.
Moral value can be determined by the being's capacity to be harmed, because sentience is the only relevant moral trait.
It's the ability and capacity to be harmed. Basically, the level of sentience along with what will reduce the most harm.
For example;
Let's say your house catches on fire, and your daughter and your dog are accidentally left behind to die of smoke inhalation. You have one last chance to go back and save one. Who do you save?
Who would suffer more should they be left behind? Your daughter clearly has greater level of understanding of what's happening around her. She understands that she will be trapped and die of either suffocation or burning. She has a greater level of anticipation of the future, a greater level of fear than the dog, and a larger understanding of the life she will miss out on. Her mental anguish will probably be far greater as well. She is more sentient, and is therefore of higher moral regard than your dog. In this scenario, her well-being matters more than the well-being of the dog.
I'd explain why the least amount of harm results in not eating animals. Anyone who claims that not eating chickens results in harm because you are "sacrificing" health benefits doesn't know much about nutrition. All of the nutrients in chicken can be found in non sentient plants or vitamin/mineral supplements. By killing chicken (or paying others to kill chicken) for nutrients, you are contributing to unnecessary animal suffering.
If they claim that their taste pleasure from eating chicken is more important than its well-being, have them explain why. Taste-pleasure is morally irrelevant. It wouldn't be moral if I killed and ate a random human on the street because I think he's tasty.
Reducing harm is all that matters, and by eating vegan over eating animals, harm is reduced.
-
- Anti-Vegan Troll
- Posts: 414
- Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm
Re: Is it the same Pain?
The evidence you're using here is really just an appeal to authority, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics is a trade group and not a scientific authority on nutrition. Also there are other similar groups (in other countries) that have more skeptical positions on vegan diets.Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:43 pm This argument isn't sound. Humans are not required to consume animal protein to be healthy.
It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diets are nutritionally adequate and may help to prevent and treat certain diseases. Vegetarian and vegan diets are appropriate for all stages of the life, including pregnancy, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood.
Also the issue isn't just about "animal protein", but rather animal products as a whole which are a source of various nutrients some of which aren't found in plant-based products. Whether or not some (or all) people are benefited by some of the non-essential nutrients found in animal product is poorly understood, people have various variants in genes that impact their ability to synthesis these non-essential nutrients.
But based on what evidence? There is a lack of good long-term longitudinal studies on vegan diets on various ethnic groups and there are many people reporting that vegan diets "don't work for them". For example the faunalytics study on ex-vegans found that the top reason for giving up the diet was related to health. Now this could be because people weren't "doing it right", some nutritional issue that impacts some people or a combination of both. But without good longitudinal studies that have evaluated the diet in various ethnic groups you cannot rule out either explanation.Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 4:02 pm By opting for black beans, lentils, legumes, and B12 supplements over chicken, you are not sacrificing health benefits for the well-being of another. Sure you're sacrificing taste pleasure and tradition, but neither of these matter more than the suffering of another.
Also even if one assumes that, in theory, everyone can thrive on a "well-planned" vegan diet that doesn't mean that its a practical option. Chicken is a ubiquitous option where as plant-based alternatives are not.
Few people would claim its just "taste pleasure", instead they have serious doubts about the long-term consequences of vegan diets and doubt they can execute the diet in their life.Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 4:02 pm If they claim that their taste pleasure from eating chicken is more important than its well-being, have them explain why. Taste-pleasure is morally irrelevant. It wouldn't be moral if I killed and ate a random human on the street because I think he's tasty.
And pleasure is not morally irrelevant, if that was the case how would you justify driving of flying for a leisure or just about anything we do in modern society? A plane trip contributes to both pollution and (wild) animal suffering, so how could you ever justify it unless it was some how critical to your survival?
I'm here to exploit you schmucks into demonstrating the blatant anti-intellectualism in the vegan community and the reality of veganism. But I can do that with any user name.
-
- Anti-Vegan Troll
- Posts: 414
- Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:54 pm
Re: Is it the same Pain?
Its really hard to compare and evaluate the experiences of various animals, but the idea that chickens are "less evolved" than other common farm animals is decidedly unscientific. Birds followed a different evolutionary trajectory than mammals but their brains are just as sophisticated and some of the most intelligent animals are birds.
I think it comes down to the fact that people just relate more to mammals due greater common ancestry, that is, mammals express themselves in ways that are just more familiar to humans.
I'm here to exploit you schmucks into demonstrating the blatant anti-intellectualism in the vegan community and the reality of veganism. But I can do that with any user name.