 |
| |
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuciwalker
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
People can be trained. So what? |
Last response, just to show how STUPID GePap was being: that was my point.
Ludd claimed that foxes are like people because you can train them to respond in different ways to stimuli. I said robots could too, therefore any argument applying to foxes because of that applies to robots. He said robots could not be trained, which is completely false. Therefore, my point stands. |
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
Yes, a robot can be trained, so can a fox, so can a human being. But a robot, at least current ones, don;t feel pain, and they "feel" things complete differently than living things- They do not work on a biochemical system created over 1 billion years, but a digital system created by people and run on silicon wafers.
There is a hugely fundamental difference between a robot and a living thing- maybe one day artifical beings might be nearly as complex as living things, but not today, and the comparison is false.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
You do, otherwise you could galdly eat scolding hot food or punch your penis for the heck of it. You think you don;t care about pain? Ask your friend to kick you in the nuts and do nothing to block it. Then we can see who gives a **** about pain.
|
BRAVO BRAVO YOU'VE ALL PICKED UP ON ME NOT ELABORATING THE OBVIOUS, HOW ABOUT A BIG MEDAL.
Obviously, my comment was made with regards to the pain as a clearly biochemical concept. The fact that this biochemical effect has a stressful influence on some biochemical system, is of little consequence to me. Obviously, it will have a lot of consequence for me if is made to a human, which is a biochemical system, that generally, barring any other parameters, I am interested in its' successful survival and advancement, because it will make me feel better ( recieve positive biochemical feedback), and just because I've been programmed to do so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
BRAVO BRAVO YOU'VE ALL PICKED UP ON ME NOT ELABORATING THE OBVIOUS, HOW ABOUT A BIG MEDAL.
Obviously, my comment was made with regards to the pain as a clearly biochemical concept. The fact that this biochemical effect has a stressful influence on some biochemical system, is of little consequence to me. Obviously, it will have a lot of consequence for me if is made to a human, which is a biochemical system, that generally, barring any other parameters, I am interested in its' successful survival and advancement, because it will make me feel better ( recieve positive biochemical feedback), and just because I've been programmed to do so. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
Yes, a robot can be trained, so can a fox, so can a human being. But a robot, at least current ones, don;t feel pain, and they "feel" things complete differently than living things- They do not work on a biochemical system created over 1 billion years, but a digital system created by people and run on silicon wafers.
There is a hugely fundamental difference between a robot and a living thing- maybe one day artifical beings might be nearly as complex as living things, but not today, and the comparison is false. |
What is this fundamental difference? And yes, a robot can feel pain. And no, a different chemical mechanism of thought is NOT a "fundamental" difference.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
|
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
Agreed -- pain is essential for survival, but that does not make the experience of pain in of itself a pleasurable experience for animals.
|
No, of course not. The point is, if we disregard empathy and emotions(*), animals' pain doesn't come into our advantages or disadvantages. And that's the only thing that matters, outside the intrahuman relationships.
(*)- (Which are very important, beneficial, healthy, and natural for human beings, because they make it possible for us to live together, and flourish, but have nothing to do with logical arguments, except being objects in them)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gibsie
|
 |
all over the proverbial shop
Jan 1970
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That isn't what you said. Obviously.
You said that the ability to feel pain is based in a nervous system. Something with five neurons could "feel" pain, by your definition. You lose. |
Sorry Kuciwalker, but you need more than BAM's and semantics to win an argument. Five neurons does not become a nervous system on the same level as seen in foxes or humans, and would not feel pain- it'd be like the computer system you describe. Organisms with such undeveloped systems would not feel anything nearly describing pain, instead the cells would indicate to the organisms what actions to take in certain situations- but with no reaction akin to pain. Thus, I'd not really have any problem with you dissecting a sea anemone for fun, but I would have a problem with you flaying a dog, as the result of your actions would lead to exactly the same sort of pain that you would feel if you were flayed.
Edit for MrFun in case he quotes his own post at me:
"So? Are we saying then that non-mammals are not animals but plants because they do not have as advanced of a nervous system as mammals??"
No, I am saying that without a more developed nervous sytem as seen in (but not limited to) mammals, the potential for pain does not exist. Coral found in reefs, for example, count as being animals, and have a "nerve net", but I would not suggest that they feel pain- would you?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Immortal Wombat
|
 |
in perpetuity
Dec 2000
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuciwalker
And finally, I will not respond to ANYONE who doesn't tell me why abortion is OK but killing foxes isn't, and who doesn't tell me how we should punish animals that harm other animals. I'm sick of my conclusive points being ignored. |
1. Abortion is "OK" while the foetus is not in independant living thing and could not survive without a mother around it: while it is effectively an extension of the mother. AFAIK, nobody seriously advocates or promotes abortion. All credible defenses of abortion admit that it is almost always preferable to let the foetus develop, but that it isn't the place of government to force this to happen while the foetus is still part of the mother.
Wild animals aren't the possession of anyone, so the argument "It's mine, let me torture it" fails. The government does have juristiction, for better or worse, over the defining of Rights For Foxes. While foxes are independant living things, then torturing them for no reason other than human amusement is wrong. Personally, I (and reds, and Mr Fun, et al) find the idea of torturing anything which can display pain that emotively utterly repugnant. Ok, so maybe seeing a live, wailing fox have its guts pulled out by bloodhounds doesn't cause you to bat an eyelid - but even if it is not biologically/philosophically wrong to torture foxes since the "aren't aware of pain" or whatever bollocks you want to wrap it in, it's one of those things which is probably bad for the human involved as well. It's like putting an 18-certificate on a film, or preventing incestuous marriages. Imagine it as an infinity-certificate on hunting.
2. Name me a single animal which tortures and maims its prey and deliberately uses inefficient methods of execution, for no other reason than entertainment (and/or tradition), and maybe this point would have some relevance.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-11-2004 04:57
my dog, and dogs in general, for example.
|