Philosophy: books and discussion - Page 49

Ea · 07-07-2010, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparrow

I don't have a problem with the term 'suffering' - I think I have experienced it to some extent; and I think I have seen it in others - e.g. witnessing sufferers trying to avoid what makes them suffer (snatching hand out of fire etc.). Although maybe they just acted as if they were suffering, but weren't actually (Descartes view).
'Suffering' is a subjective term, but I don't think it's any more problematic than other subjective words.

Well - I have a problem with understanding the term "suffering". What does it mean in this context? I haven't read Peter Singer. You refer to your own experience - what constitutes "suffering" to you, and is it the same as the "suffering" that Peter Singer writes about (I presume he does). Without a definition it's meaningless to discuss the morality of the relief - or not - of the hypothetical "suffering" of other living things.

TGS · 07-07-2010, 06:29 AM

Is suffering like having a headache - which you can't have without knowing you have it, or is it like having a brain tumour, which you can have and know nothing about it? Does there have to be some phenomenological content to suffering - does it have to feel like something, or is it enough for certain things to be true for suffering to be present - the sheep is kept in a barn, in darkness with no room to gambol and frolick in a sheep like way, therefore it suffers?

Ea · 07-07-2010, 07:45 AM

Good questions, TGS.

Also, what would weigh heaviest, acute, here-and-now suffering vs. long-term suffering?
And, what about the general suffering of a species population vs. an individual member of a species?

Ea · 07-07-2010, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

The opinion of Peter Singer is that the ability to experience pain is tantamount. <...>

But how does he determine what pain is without comparing it to a human experience of pain?

Sparrow · 07-07-2010, 08:15 AM

How do we know anything feels pain apart from ourselves? So there may not be a human experience of pain.

In 'Animal Liberation', Singer says:
"Nearly all the external signs which lead us to infer pain in other humans can be seen in other species..." he then quotes from scientific reasearchers, e.g. the aptly named Lord Brain ('one of the most eminent neurologists of our time'):
"I personally can see no reason for conceding mind to my fellow men and denying it to animals...I at least cannot doubt that the interests and activities of animals are correlated with awareness and feeling in the same way as my own, and which may be, for aught I know, just as vivid."

"Every particle of factual evidence supports the contention that the higher mammalian vertebrates experience pain sensations at least as acute as our own." Richard Serjeant 'The Spectrum of Pain'.

TimMason · 07-07-2010, 09:10 AM

Quote:

There are some "other" things in the world that I perhaps don't feel guilty about throwing - a rock, a banana, a spider, a snail...- and other things that I would feel guilty about throwing - a baby, a puppy, a fish... How do we work out which things are in the throwable group and which things are in the unthrowable group?

Google 'dwarf tossing'. As for puppies, go live for a while in a country where dogs are seen as pests, rather like rats. Having spent two years in the French West Indies, I can safely say that there are people who would be amazed at your reticence in the matter of puppy throwing.

People are far stranger than you might think.

troymc · 07-07-2010, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TGS

Is suffering like having a headache - which you can't have without knowing you have it, or is it like having a brain tumour, which you can have and know nothing about it? Does there have to be some phenomenological content to suffering - does it have to feel like something, or is it enough for certain things to be true for suffering to be present - the sheep is kept in a barn, in darkness with no room to gambol and frolick in a sheep like way, therefore it suffers?

I like this question and would like to add:

What happens when an animal becomes inured? Has the suffering stopped? Has the morality changed?

Troy

troymc · 07-07-2010, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ea

Actually, why should we minimise suffering? I'm asking in a "devil's advocate" sense, but really, why should we? Because it gives us a warm fuzzy feeling? Is it advantageous for us as a species?

My gut feeling towards both suffering and causing it, is to avoid it if I can, but I really don't see a good explanation for why, and I don't understand why I should feel like this. I happen to do so, but I'm not sure at all whether it's right. It's certainly not rational, and I think that bothers me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ea

Hmm... what if I suggested that the only real reason behind minimising "suffering" and "being good to anmals" is because it gives us warm fuzzy feelings? And because we (most of us), and the society we live in, can afford those feelings.

I think someone mentioned "caretaker." I fully believe that eliminating suffering *does* help us as a species. I would almost ask "How can it not?" I don't know of anything which thrives while suffering. And all species are interdependent to some extent.

Troy

Sparrow · 07-07-2010, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troymc

I like this question and would like to add:

What happens when an animal becomes inured? Has the suffering stopped? Has the morality changed?

Troy

I think that to suffer (as in feel pain or great discomfort in body or mind) you need to be aware that you are suffering.

Using the defintion for inure at http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/inured.html - I'd say the suffering stops when that happens. Although morality doesn't change (i.e. we still want to avoid causing suffering), different behaviour might become appropriate to achieve that moral objective.
A human example could be causing suffering by releasing someone from an institution to which they've become completely habituated; even if they were reluctantly incarcerated in the first place.

troymc · 07-07-2010, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimMason

Google 'dwarf tossing'. As for puppies, go live for a while in a country where dogs are seen as pests, rather like rats. Having spent two years in the French West Indies, I can safely say that there are people who would be amazed at your reticence in the matter of puppy throwing.

People are far stranger than you might think.

Or check Wikipedia for 'dog meat' -- Warning: the images there aren't for the faint of heart (or any dog lovers.)

I think we're dancing around the concept of "universal morality" vs "relativistic morality". I am on the relativistic side myself.

Troy

Ea · 07-07-2010, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troymc

I think someone mentioned "caretaker." I fully believe that eliminating suffering *does* help us as a species. I would almost ask "How can it not?" I don't know of anything which thrives while suffering. And all species are interdependent to some extent.

I was thinking about suffering of other species than our own. I could see a point in relation to food animals, as the quality of meat definitely is affected by how the animal is treated. But I'm less sure about whether relieving suffering in general helps anything. I wondered if you have an example of that?

TGS · 07-07-2010, 10:42 AM

And where does intention fit in to all this? Is intentionally causing suffering worse that unintentionally causing suffering? Is unintentionally causing suffering through being recklessness worse than unintentionally causing suffering through ignorance? (I know ants suffer but I can't be bothered to take care to not step on them v. I have no idea whether ants suffer because I couldn't give stuff about ants and have never bothered to find out whether they suffer). What if the my primary aim is not to cause suffering but I know that an inevitable consequence of my action will be that suffering is caused, (the dentist who removed my wisdom teeth caused me more suffering than my wisdom teeth did).

How do we manage to get out of bed in the morning with all this to sort out before we can do anything, I wonder.

TimMason · 07-07-2010, 11:28 AM

Quote:

How do we manage to get out of bed in the morning with all this to sort out before we can do anything, I wonder.

Which is why we leave it to philosophers.

Sparrow · 07-07-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimMason

Which is why we leave it to philosophers.

Pfft, 3,000 years they've had to sort this out.

I've just rung one up - he says it'll be ready next Monday.

tdmsu · 07-07-2010, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TGS

And where does intention fit in to all this? Is intentionally causing suffering worse that unintentionally causing suffering? Is unintentionally causing suffering through being recklessness worse than unintentionally causing suffering through ignorance?

To me ignorance is worse, especially if one is aware of being ignorant and yet continues to behave in such a way as to cause suffering. Carelessness may cause an equal amount of suffering, if such a thing can be objectively measured at all, but the indifference implied by ignorance seems worse.

Intentionally causing suffering to me is obviously worse than doing so by mistake or ignorance.

I wonder what value one who purposely inflicts suffering gains? Perhaps some sort of justice? But does that apply to food animals?

07-07-2010, 08:15 AM	#725
Sparrow Wizard Posts: 4,395 Karma: 1358132 Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: UK Device: Palm TX, CyBook Gen3	How do we know anything feels pain apart from ourselves? So there may not be a human experience of pain. In 'Animal Liberation', Singer says: "Nearly all the external signs which lead us to infer pain in other humans can be seen in other species..." he then quotes from scientific reasearchers, e.g. the aptly named Lord Brain ('one of the most eminent neurologists of our time'): "I personally can see no reason for conceding mind to my fellow men and denying it to animals...I at least cannot doubt that the interests and activities of animals are correlated with awareness and feeling in the same way as my own, and which may be, for aught I know, just as vivid." "Every particle of factual evidence supports the contention that the higher mammalian vertebrates experience pain sensations at least as acute as our own." Richard Serjeant 'The Spectrum of Pain'. Last edited by Sparrow; 07-07-2010 at 08:21 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Philosophy eBooks	dhume01	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	8	07-28-2010 12:18 PM
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy	FlorenceArt	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	6	08-29-2009 07:43 PM
Christian and Philosophy books on Kindle?	nathanb	Amazon Kindle	11	07-07-2009 09:57 PM
interesting discussion on pricing of fiction books	Liviu_5	News	4	10-10-2007 09:27 AM
Book2Book mobile e-books discussion	shalmaneser	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	0	08-05-2005 05:49 AM

07-07-2010, 06:29 AM	#722
TGS Country Member Posts: 9,058 Karma: 7676767 Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Denmark Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.	Is suffering like having a headache - which you can't have without knowing you have it, or is it like having a brain tumour, which you can have and know nothing about it? Does there have to be some phenomenological content to suffering - does it have to feel like something, or is it enough for certain things to be true for suffering to be present - the sheep is kept in a barn, in darkness with no room to gambol and frolick in a sheep like way, therefore it suffers?

07-07-2010, 07:45 AM	#723
Ea Wizard Posts: 3,490 Karma: 5239563 Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Denmark Device: Kindle 3\|iPad air\|iPhone 4S	Good questions, TGS. Also, what would weigh heaviest, acute, here-and-now suffering vs. long-term suffering? And, what about the general suffering of a species population vs. an individual member of a species?

07-07-2010, 10:42 AM	#732
TGS Country Member Posts: 9,058 Karma: 7676767 Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Denmark Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.	And where does intention fit in to all this? Is intentionally causing suffering worse that unintentionally causing suffering? Is unintentionally causing suffering through being recklessness worse than unintentionally causing suffering through ignorance? (I know ants suffer but I can't be bothered to take care to not step on them v. I have no idea whether ants suffer because I couldn't give stuff about ants and have never bothered to find out whether they suffer). What if the my primary aim is not to cause suffering but I know that an inevitable consequence of my action will be that suffering is caused, (the dentist who removed my wisdom teeth caused me more suffering than my wisdom teeth did). How do we manage to get out of bed in the morning with all this to sort out before we can do anything, I wonder.