Ah, I was lazily wondering where to find these expressions of the idea that the lives of wild animals are a net hedonic negative. Very helpful! And the article is nice, too, although personally I have difficulty giving any credit to the idea that animals are better off never born.
Schopenhauer thought we should prevent humans from having sex for similar reasons:
“If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence? or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood.”
Excerpt from: "Studies in Pessimism, On Human Nature, and Religion: a Dialogue, etc." by Arthur Schopenhauer. Scribd.
The Hudson used to be thoroughly polluted. Swimming in it was seen as insane, and it was very difficult to catch anything for lack of fish.
Now I look out the window and cringe. The water has been cleared, pollution reduced and the fish have returned. These poor creatures, with their net-negative existence, have another environment to reproduce and flourish in. It must have been far more moral when elevated pollutant levels and CO2 kept the river sterile of most animal life.
There's the Logan's Run idea which is manifest in the modern medical industry: The most suffering happens in the oldest years. I say Logan's Run because the logical conclusion is to kill anyone instantly and painlessly when they reach a specific age.
"For survivors to age 85, more than one-third of their lifetime expenditures will accrue in their remaining years."
If you use medical spending as a proxy for suffering, which I just made up but sounds pretty persuasive, a third of life's suffering happens in those few years after 85.
With fish it means if you Logan's Run them at age, I dunno, 3 and eat them you cut off the major years of suffering for them.
Ah, I was lazily wondering where to find these expressions of the idea that the lives of wild animals are a net hedonic negative. Very helpful! And the article is nice, too, although personally I have difficulty giving any credit to the idea that animals are better off never born.
Schopenhauer thought we should prevent humans from having sex for similar reasons:
“If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence? or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood.”
Excerpt from: "Studies in Pessimism, On Human Nature, and Religion: a Dialogue, etc." by Arthur Schopenhauer. Scribd.
This material may be protected by copyright.
Read this book on Everand: https://www.everand.com/book/351496597
The Hudson used to be thoroughly polluted. Swimming in it was seen as insane, and it was very difficult to catch anything for lack of fish.
Now I look out the window and cringe. The water has been cleared, pollution reduced and the fish have returned. These poor creatures, with their net-negative existence, have another environment to reproduce and flourish in. It must have been far more moral when elevated pollutant levels and CO2 kept the river sterile of most animal life.
There's the Logan's Run idea which is manifest in the modern medical industry: The most suffering happens in the oldest years. I say Logan's Run because the logical conclusion is to kill anyone instantly and painlessly when they reach a specific age.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/
"For survivors to age 85, more than one-third of their lifetime expenditures will accrue in their remaining years."
If you use medical spending as a proxy for suffering, which I just made up but sounds pretty persuasive, a third of life's suffering happens in those few years after 85.
With fish it means if you Logan's Run them at age, I dunno, 3 and eat them you cut off the major years of suffering for them.