-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Eating Apes
- Thread starter Shrew
- Start date
Journey-man
New Member
The difference between a Cow and a Gorilla in terms of the sophistication of their social relationships, and overall intelligence is quite a big gap. I think if you have a humanistic approach and value sentience then animals like dolphins and other apes should be respected and protected in ways that are different from other animals (especially those domesticated and unable to be integrated into a natural context due to human artificial selection).
OK, so you had to have someone coming in with this kind of thing at some point, so let's get it out of the way: If you're going to eat an animal, you are causing suffering to a being with a substantial degree of sentience. This may be to a greater or lesser degree depending on the animal (gorilla vs sheep or whatever) but the different is of degree rather than kind. So if you think causing suffering is a problem to the degree that you wouldn't wanna eat apes on account of it, then the only consistent position is to stop eating animals altogether.
Apes look too much like me.
Would you fry me up for a nosh?
Would you fry me up for a nosh?
Pets and apes that are kept in cages then killed: no.
Wild apes or apes that die of old age: yes.
I do not think it is unthinkable to eat wild apes, but it is mean to keep them as pets, lab animals or zoo animals and then turn around and betray them by killing them for food. There's something wrong with that.
Wild apes or apes that die of old age: yes.
I do not think it is unthinkable to eat wild apes, but it is mean to keep them as pets, lab animals or zoo animals and then turn around and betray them by killing them for food. There's something wrong with that.
So we can hunt them but not farm them?
Provided that you make me your king for life and pay me taxes, you may rely upon my judgment in all things.
WhatAMess-enger
Member
Um, it's pretty obviously closer to eating your own brother than eating... A fish or a grape. Besides being morally wrong, its unhealthy. People that eat monkeys are usually tribal or forest dwellers. The people that become slaves to the farmer
Haha, OK, let me rephrase. Would you eat hunted ape but not farmed ape?
I would eat it perhaps and probably would not like it. I have tried alligator, frog, crab, scallop and rabbit. I do not like any of them. Apes are just animals, but if they make an attachment to people then they are more than just animals to me. I think that is how it should be and they should not be food for humans at that point. Like, I would not eat Mr. Chips.
Cows and gorillas are equally sentient, though gorillas seem to be more sapient. That said, I don't think intelligence is necessarily the best factor to consider in determining our moral relationship with other animals.
I think the "ick" factor (moral foundation #6 -- Haidt) is the major consideration in Shrew's proposal. I don't think this should be a factor in determining moral propriety.
Why, if I might ask?
They look like short hairy people.
They have been portrayed as quite intelligent.
I have no idea if they really are but on t-v they seem so.
I'm used to eating meat from the store labeled , pork, beef, etc.
I'm used to taking to the woods and fields and getting my own food.
They look like distant human cousins.
Hey, you didn't say a response had to be rational now did you?
Same reason I'd balk at eating my dog, your dog, any dog.
Or house cat for that matter.
Kind of a social taboo.
In other societies dogs and cats are staple foods and there is no such
thing as a stray dog.
Native Americans ate their horses when no longer fit for work.
I'd shun eating a horse.
Don't bring up "what if you were starving to death either.
Were that a fact I'd kill and eat you. Nothing personal.
So the "ick" factor. Kind of subjective, IMHO.
So there's a hierarchy of edibility, based on intelligence (and ickyness, of course
).Yes -- taboo #6.
But I'm an ape -- and icky! (everybody says so).
Last edited:
You're an ape and icky and make very little sense. ( you said so)
Your drivel is downright stupid.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
You asked a direct question and I gave direct though personal answers
to which you delighted in poking fun at my expense.
You know what I think of your intellect or lack thereof.
You admit to being an icky ape and even admit others say so.
Those are not human qualities and I would not be bragging about that.
It isn't very human to be compared to an ape then brag about it.
Your drivel is downright stupid.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
You asked a direct question and I gave direct though personal answers
to which you delighted in poking fun at my expense.
You know what I think of your intellect or lack thereof.
You admit to being an icky ape and even admit others say so.
Those are not human qualities and I would not be bragging about that.
It isn't very human to be compared to an ape then brag about it.
How come? Wouldn't an animals intellect mean varying degrees of suffering in the same conditions? Or do you think only physical suffering exists in non-human animals?
I think what he was trying to convey was that if that if the animal has sentience, then they most likely feel pain regardless of their intelligence.