#Animal ethics

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

hi! can i ask what's ur opinion on giving pets away? not necessarily because u can't afford to care for em anymore but maybe incompatibility of personalities or maybe lifestyles. is it wrong to give ur pet for adoption if u know someone who's better suited for keeping a pet, like emotionally?

This is going to be controversial, but I support making that choice.

There’s a lot of rhetoric lately around how it’s evil and unethical to rehome your pet if you don’t “need to.” And what that does is prioritize human ideology over the actual animal’s well-being.

Pets that aren’t a good match for your home or pets that aren’t really wanted anymore frequently have lower welfare! When caring for an animal becomes a burden or is forced, people end up resenting them, and that means the animal often doesn’t get all of its needs fulfilled. Even if you’re still feeding it and providing appropriate vet care, how likely are you to provide affection or enrichment to an animal you’re tired of being stuck with?

Lifestyle and personality really matter to making sure a pet is a good fit for a home. A dog that alert-barks at every leaf that moves is probably a bad fit for someone who has a chronic migraine syndrome, and they might not know that until the dog has been in the home for weeks and started to open up. A really feisty kitten that requires a ton of play might not do best in the home of someone older who wanted a quiet lap cat. And while you can you do your best to plan to find a compatible animal, you won’t always know ahead of time what issues might arise.

“Forever home” rhetoric is really, really popular and I think it’s very unfair to the animals it is supposed to support. It started with the backlash of seeing animals abandoned inappropriately, and has been heavily reinforced in the public mind because it’s so frequently used to drive fundraising and support for legislation. The whole “forever home” concept communicates to people that getting an animal is an immutable commitment and that if you can’t keep an animal, it is a personal moral failing. It frames human priorities (we think people who get rid of animals are Evil and Bad and should be shunned) as more important than actual welfare needs for individual animals (are they getting the care they need where they are).

Obviously, I don’t support people dumping animals or just getting fad pets they’ll discard immediately, but there’s so many alternate situations that can arise. Even if it’s just “they got a pet and didn’t know what caring for it would take and didn’t want to care for it so they brought it back, how awful” like… okay, I’d like the person to have done more research before they got a pet, but isn’t it better that the animal now has a second chance to go to better home? Knowing what a commitment requires theoretically can be very different than having to actually follow through regularly, and I’d rather see someone maturely acknowledge that having an animal isn’t a good fit than keep it anyway!!

If animals being happy and with all their biological, veterinary, and social needs fulfilled is actually the goal, we need to prioritize their welfare over human opinion. I’d much rather see an animal rehomed responsibly to somewhere it will thrive and be welcomed than see people keep animals they can’t/don’t want to care for out of guilt or shame. 

[fimbry]

Lykoi the werewolf cat breed

So I’m not going to be arguing because I’ve seen enough from enough owners over the years to have reached this conclusion, and I’m not in well enough health to come back to this. But I’m seeing the lykoi breed get more attention around tumblr lately, and I’ve gotta speak up because the breed has a dirty little secret.

I joined the Lykoi Lovers group years ago because I loved this breed, they’re super cute! I love werewolves! However, over the years, as more people got these cats, and their cats aged up (3-5+yo is when skin issues become REALLY evident) the group turned into a horror show.

This mutation really reminds me of lemon frost in leopard geckos. In the geckos, it was the desirable appearance which CAUSED the cancerous tumors. It wasn’t something that could be bred out. Similarly, it is the werewolf appearance which causes the skin issues, cysts, pimples, bleeding in the cats. You can breed away from it... and end up with a normal looking cat with fewer skin issues. You cannot seem to keep the werewolf look AND have good skin.

More below, and it IS graphic so be warned. Pus, blood, sad cats under the cut.

Let’s start with "what to know before getting a Lykoi”

Okay, inevitably bumpy? What’s that mean exactly?

“The gene that is specific to Lykoi that creates the semi hairless and roaning look is thought to be responsible for less hair follicles and possibly smaller pores. This in turn could be responsible for the cyst/pimple issue. So, it's not going to be in Sphinx or any other breed, it's specific to Lykoi. Responsible breeders are currently working on breaking away from some of the older lines with bad skin and breed Lykoi that have no or less bumps. However what happens when you breed for more coat and better skin is that it seems to lessen the look of the Lykoi. Many of the heavier coated Lykoi without skin issues lack a mask or have a very slight one.“

^^^This is pretty damning as far as the future of the breed goes. Well bred ones will not look like werewolf cats.

Okay, but that’s just a couple cats, and just one cyst. That’s not so bad---

“They definitely bother me more than her.” You sure about that?? Look at her...

Okay but that’s just a FEW cats, how bad could it b--

Again, this issue typically appears after the cat is 3-5 years old, so people buy their little werewolf cats unwise to the fact it’ll live with painful skin problems for the majority of its life.

It is the very mutation which reduces follicle count and pore size which causes the werewolf appearance and the blackheads and cysts, so I think “breeding it out” is nothing but a pipe dream. The mutation itself is what causes the problems, as mentioned earlier just like lemon frost leopard geckos.

Anyway, this has been a PSA.

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Sentience

The philosophy of sentience explores the nature of conscious experience, the ability to feel, perceive, and experience subjectively. It is central to debates in ethics, philosophy of mind, and the nature of being. Sentience is often linked to discussions about what entities have moral worth, the nature of consciousness, and the criteria for subjective experience.

1. Definition of Sentience

Sentience refers to the capacity to have subjective experiences or feelings. In contrast to mere information processing or cognition, sentience is characterized by a conscious awareness of sensory and emotional states, such as pain, pleasure, fear, or joy.

It is often distinguished from sapience, which refers to higher-order intellectual faculties like reasoning, wisdom, and problem-solving.

2. Sentience and Consciousness

Sentience is often discussed as a subset of consciousness. While all sentient beings are conscious (in that they experience sensations), not all conscious beings may be considered sentient in the ethical sense (if they do not experience suffering or pleasure in the same way).

Philosophical questions arise about the degree of phenomenal consciousness (the first-person subjective experience) that different beings possess, and whether machines or artificial systems could ever achieve sentience.

3. Sentience and Moral Consideration

Utilitarian Ethics: Philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer argue that sentience is the key criterion for moral consideration. According to this view, any being that can experience pleasure or pain deserves moral concern, regardless of its species or intellectual capabilities.

Peter Singer’s Argument for Animal Rights: Singer's utilitarian perspective advocates for the equal consideration of interests, extending moral concern to non-human animals that can suffer. Singer’s argument has led to the modern animal rights movement and a rethinking of ethical duties to sentient beings beyond humans.

Rights-Based Approaches: Some philosophers argue for rights to be extended to sentient beings, not merely based on their capacity for reason or autonomy, but on their ability to suffer. This leads to discussions of rights for animals and, in more futuristic contexts, artificial intelligence (AI) or sentient robots.

Moral Status of AI: With the advancement of artificial intelligence, the question arises whether machines can ever become sentient, and if so, whether they would deserve moral consideration. This touches on the moral status of artificial systems and how we should treat them if they ever develop subjective experiences.

4. Sentience and Non-Human Animals

The philosophical study of animal sentience is concerned with understanding which animals are sentient and how their sentience compares to human consciousness. This involves both scientific and philosophical inquiry into the nature of animal minds.

Animal Sentience and Consciousness: Research in cognitive science has shown that many non-human animals exhibit complex behaviors and signs of emotional and sensory experiences. Philosophers like Thomas Nagel in his famous essay "What Is It Like to Be a Bat?" explore how sentience might differ across species, suggesting that the subjective experience of being another kind of animal may be inaccessible to humans.

Speciesism: The philosophy of sentience challenges the idea of speciesism, a form of bias that grants higher moral status to humans over animals based solely on species membership. Philosophers like Peter Singer argue that sentience should be the benchmark for moral consideration, not intellectual or species-based distinctions.

5. Sentience in Artificial Intelligence and Machines

Can machines be sentient? This question lies at the intersection of philosophy, artificial intelligence, and cognitive science. Philosophers and computer scientists debate whether AI can ever develop subjective experiences or whether they merely simulate cognitive functions.

The Chinese Room Argument (John Searle): In his famous thought experiment, Searle argues that even if a machine can simulate understanding of language or cognition, it does not mean that it is sentient. According to Searle, machines might process information but lack the subjective awareness that characterizes sentience.

Functionalism and Sentience: Some functionalist philosophers argue that if a machine or AI system can functionally replicate the processes that give rise to sentience in humans (e.g., neural activity), it may indeed be sentient. However, others contest that functional replication is insufficient to create true subjective experiences.

6. Sentience and Conscious Experience

The hard problem of consciousness, as articulated by David Chalmers, involves explaining why and how sentient experiences (qualia) arise from physical processes. Even if we understand the brain's functions, there remains the mystery of how these functions lead to subjective experiences like the sensation of red or the feeling of pain.

Panpsychism: One solution proposed by some philosophers is panpsychism, the idea that consciousness or sentience is a fundamental property of the universe, present even in basic forms in all matter. This would suggest that all entities, even non-living ones, have some degree of sentience, though perhaps vastly different from human experience.

7. Degrees of Sentience

Sentience is often understood in degrees, where some beings are capable of more complex, nuanced experiences than others. For example, humans may experience a wide range of emotions, reflections, and pleasures, while simpler animals or even AI may only experience basic sensations like pleasure or pain.

Philosophical Issues: Philosophers explore how we determine the degree of sentience in different beings, whether there is a qualitative difference between human and animal sentience, and whether any entities besides biological organisms could possess it.

8. Sentience and Self-Awareness

Some philosophers link sentience to self-awareness, suggesting that to be sentient, one must not only feel but be aware of oneself as the subject of those feelings. This leads to further debates on whether animals or machines could ever achieve self-awareness or whether that is a uniquely human trait.

The philosophy of sentience is concerned with the nature of conscious experience, the capacity to feel and perceive, and the ethical implications of sentience. It raises questions about the moral status of animals, AI, and other beings, as well as the deeper metaphysical question of how subjective experience arises from physical processes. Sentience is central to many debates about what it means to be conscious and what obligations we have to other sentient beings.

[nerdybugnightmares]

Honestly I don't really like dogs, they terrify me, I hate them.

I think we should just kill them all, chop their heads off and set their bodies on fire and just wipe them from existence or turn their coats into bags. The best dogs are dead ones.

Did this anger you?

Thankfully I love dogs and don't think this at all.

But,

I see the exact same shit written about snakes and spiders etc ALL the time.

Including and in particular people's pets.

If this upset you, if you wanted to call me out, send me abusive messages about it before reading the end, here's your sign to stop doing it to other people's pets just because YOU don't like them.

[esarkaye]

on nonhuman animal capabilities and flourishing

[cathartidae]

hi do u know if this is safe for the snail? ive heard that water can dry out snails but im not sure if thats true https://www.tumblr.com/heartnosekid/712984118234955776/natashenka-on-ig

hi! im not a huge snail expert however i Do know a guy- and here's what xey said: doing this with snails washes out their mucous layer a little (itd be more fine if it was trickling like rain or misting water with a spray bottle or something) but most importanly this is stressful for the snail and generally advised against. these look like they could be gals (giant african land snails) and those are known to need a bit extra moisture, but not to the extent of pouring water on them like this. soooo tldr doesnt dry them out but does cause stress

thanks for reaching out, and good eye :)

[science-fiction-is-real]

Opinions about dogs.

1) the adopt don't shop crowd is wrong. There are a very large number of legitimate reasons to want a puppy instead of an adult dog, to want a pure bred with a predictable temperament and predictable health outcomes instead of a dog of unknown origins. You are not hurting dogs by going to a reputable breeder. It sucks that there are lots of dogs in shelters but you aren't a horrible person because you want to be picky about a (potentially dangerous!) animal that you bring into your house.

2) yes, that poodle mix is probably from a backyard breeder. Backyard breeders and puppy mills are one of the main reasons why pure bred dogs often have so many health problems. If you want a puppy do your research and make sure the breeder is doing extensive genetic testing, and that their dogs are being "proven" in some way such as through show, sports, or obedience classes.

3) mutts are not necessarily healthier than pure breds. A mixed breed dog can still have genetic problems. My dog was a mix of more than 10 different breeds (DNA test) and he still inherited really bad dry eye from his schnauzer ancestor four generations back. He also had horrible arthritis. Breeders who do genetic testing are the key to making sure future generations of dogs are healthier

4). Even if a dog breeder is a member of a prominent kennel club, even if they breed to standard, genetically test, only breed dogs with the best temperament, that does not make them an ethical breeder.

Many of these breeders are still pairing dogs that are close genetic relatives.

And also, there are some breeds of dog that CANNOT be ethically bred. The only way to ethically breed such a dog is if you are crossing it with something else.

Brachycephalic breeds need to go extinct. Pugs, bull dogs, boxers, Boston terriers, there is no ethical way to breed these dogs because the main characteristic that makes them the breed they are is actually a horrific genetic deformity that causes the dog to suffer.

Shar peis with their extreme wrinkles should go extinct.

Dalmatians should go extinct because the same genes that cause them to be white with black spots also cause them to be prone to deafness and kidney problems.

And there are other breeds that are like this.

[solarpunkpresentspodcast]

I (Ariel) recently listened to the audiobook version of Animals in Translation: Using the Mysteries of Autism to Decode Animal Behavior by Temple Grandin and Catherine Johnson. It really shone a light on how far we’ve come both in our understanding of neurodiversity and the language we use to talk about it; it also caused me to realize how very little I actually know about animal behaviour. It’s free to read over on our Patreon; I’d really like you to go take a look!

[happylittletidalwave]

One thing about working at a zoological institute is, the need to see the animals you care for as not a part of your life. What I mean is when talking about them upper management always reminds us that they are the institutes animals. When we are mine or ours, but to me that is just taking pride in your work. How can you expect someone, who spends 40+ hours a week with these animals not to consider them an important part of our lives. We are with them on holidays, bad weather, and think about them even when we are not there with them.

[crow-hopping]

Lobsters trapped in grocery stores make me feel extremely upset.

Once free to roam the ocean, spend time with their family, exist by their own accord. Now trapped within the glass, watching their inmates slowly be picked off one by one. Relief is sweet if in captivity. I would prefer death over capture. Freedom to die.

It sickens me. Captivity. A life of freedom get stuck in such a small space, only to entice people to eat you. Your claws clamped shut. They may never open again. You’re packed so closely with your peers that there is barely any distinction.

Have they ever even seen the wonders of the earth? Or were they born in captivity? What makes my life any more valuable than theirs? What defines my value? Why am I not in that tank, resigned to my space?

It’s awful. It shatters my soul. I believe it is natural to eat and be eaten. You know what isn’t natural? Torturing them before you do. It isn’t right. What makes us any better than them? Why must they be stuck in captivity while I am free?

[anaxerneas]

From Douglas Parmée's introduction to Nature Stories

[fimbry]

Hi! I’m trying to understand more about the ethics of the Lykoi breed. So far, your post is the only one I’ve seen covering the cysts that lykoi cats get, and while I think you did a great job formatting the posts, I’m wondering if you have any sources for the condition that aren’t based on facebook posts? (This isnt hate or shade, I’m genuinely interested in looking into this deeper) thank you <3

Hello!

Most of what I know is from the FB group, but there are some studies linked by people on the post. I know one study is linked in the comments, and if I recall someone made a long reblog with studies linked as a reply to the post. I'm on mobile or I'd dig these up myself! But they are there, and I hope this helps.

[cherryaire]

Stop buying purebred animals that you KNOW will be in pain later in life.

Literally if the demand for them stops, so does the supply. But because people are so interested in the 'aesthetic' of their animal over their wellbeing, people continue to buy animals with purposefully bred docked tails, flat brachycephalic faces, and short legs. Munchkin cats are literally being force bred with DWARFISM, just as Corgis are. Dwarfism comes with so many health complications, whether it's an animal or a person who has it. There's less study into how Munchkin cats suffer as they're a newer breed and most of the studying went into identifying their specific types of dwarfism first.

If the mutation happened randomly, as it does sometimes, that's one thing. But people are purposefully breeding these poor animals knowing that they can't breathe, they have spinal problems, and they will end up with arthritis and in a ton of pain the older they get because they're literally missing proper joint strength by shortening their legs on purpose. People are essentially making these animals suffer in some form for their entire lives because they want their pet to be cute. What human beings have done to the Pug since the 60s should be considered a crime.

And do not even get me started on the breeds that are mixed with literal wild cats like Savannahs and Bengals and Wolf Dogs. Do NOT get those animals.

ADOPT. DON'T SHOP.

Resources: Munchkin Cats Brachycephalic Cats Ethical Breeding (has links to papers within the text)

[solarpunkpresentspodcast]

3.2: Thinking About How We Think About Animals with Dr Chloë Taylor

Today’s episode is all about animal ethics—or do we mean critical animal studies? @arielkroon discusses this linguistic nuance and the differences between them (and much, much more!) with Dr Chloë Taylor, professor of women and gender studies at University of Alberta.

Today’s episode is all about animal ethics—or do we mean critical animal studies? Ariel discusses this linguistic nuance and the difference between them (and much, much more!) with Dr Chloë Taylor, professor of women and gender studies at the University of Alberta. Dr Taylor has been involved in a five-year-long project researching the “Intersections of Animality” and is a trained philosopher who works in gender studies, and sees a lot of intersections between the way that we think about and treat animals and the way that we think about and treat minoritized subjects. Come join us for a thought-provoking and highly educational discussion here!

Links

Dr Chloë Taylor’s profile at University of Alberta 

Peter Singer and Tom Regan

North American Association for Critical Animal Studies

Where Disability Rights and Animal Rights Meet: A Conversation with Sunaura Taylor

Making Kin: An Interview with Donna Haraway 

Auroch de-extinction and rewilding

Connect with Solarpunk Presents Podcast on Twitter, Mastodon, or at our blog.

Connect with Ariel at her blog, on Twitter at @arielletje, and on Mastodon.

Connect with Christina at her blog, on Twitter, and on Mastodon

Support the show on Patreon or make a one-time donation via PayPal.

[loudtravelerlight]

"Animal Ethics: Navigating the Moral Landscape of Human-Animal Relationships"

Animal ethics is a field of inquiry that examines the moral considerations involved in human-animal relationships. It encompasses a broad range of issues, including the treatment of animals in agriculture, research, entertainment, and as pets. This essay explores the key principles and debates within animal ethics, highlighting the various perspectives that shape our understanding of how animals should be treated.

At the heart of animal ethics is the question of moral status: Do animals have rights, and if so, what are those rights? Traditionally, many societies have viewed animals primarily as resources for human use. This perspective is grounded in anthropocentrism, the belief that human beings are the most significant entities in the universe and that animals exist to serve human needs. This view has justified practices such as factory farming, animal testing, and hunting for sport.

However, the rise of the animal rights movement in the latter half of the 20th century challenged this anthropocentric view. Pioneers like Peter Singer and Tom Regan argued that animals, like humans, are sentient beings capable of experiencing pain and pleasure. Therefore, they should be afforded certain moral considerations. Singer’s utilitarian approach emphasizes minimizing suffering, suggesting that the interests of animals should be weighed equally with those of humans. Regan, on the other hand, advocates for the inherent value of animals, arguing that they possess intrinsic rights that should not be violated.

One of the central principles in animal ethics is the concept of sentience. Sentience refers to the capacity to have subjective experiences, such as feeling pain or pleasure. The recognition of animal sentience has significant implications for how we treat animals. If animals can suffer, then causing them unnecessary harm is morally wrong. This principle underlies many animal protection laws and regulations worldwide, which aim to reduce animal suffering in various contexts.

In the context of agriculture, the treatment of animals raised for food has been a major focus of ethical debate. Factory farming, which involves raising large numbers of animals in confined and often inhumane conditions, has been widely criticized for its negative impact on animal welfare. Critics argue that the suffering inflicted on animals in factory farms is unjustifiable, especially given the availability of alternative, more humane farming methods. Some advocates call for a shift towards plant-based diets, which they argue can reduce animal suffering and promote environmental sustainability.

Animal testing is another contentious issue within animal ethics. While animal experimentation has contributed to significant scientific and medical advancements, it also raises serious ethical concerns. Many animals used in research are subjected to painful procedures and live in stressful conditions. Opponents of animal testing argue that it is morally unacceptable to sacrifice animal welfare for human benefits, especially when alternative methods, such as in vitro testing and computer modeling, are available. The ethical debate over animal testing often revolves around the balance between the potential benefits to humans and the moral costs to animals.

The use of animals in entertainment, such as circuses, zoos, and aquariums, also raises ethical questions. Critics argue that keeping animals in captivity for human amusement often leads to physical and psychological suffering. For example, animals in circuses are frequently subjected to harsh training methods and live in inadequate conditions. Zoos and aquariums, while often justified on educational and conservation grounds, can also pose significant welfare issues for the animals involved. Animal rights advocates call for the phasing out of such practices in favor of more humane and ethical alternatives.

Pets, or companion animals, present another dimension of animal ethics. While many people view pets as beloved family members, the breeding, sale, and treatment of pets can raise ethical concerns. Issues such as puppy mills, where dogs are bred in poor conditions for profit, highlight the potential for exploitation and suffering in the pet industry. Additionally, the abandonment and neglect of pets pose serious welfare issues. Ethical pet ownership involves not only providing adequate care but also considering the broader implications of how pets are sourced and bred.

Animal ethics also intersects with broader environmental and social justice issues. The exploitation of animals is often linked to other forms of exploitation and inequality, such as labor abuses in the meatpacking industry and environmental degradation caused by intensive animal agriculture. An ethical approach to human-animal relationships must therefore consider these interconnected issues and strive for solutions that promote justice and sustainability for all beings.

In conclusion, Animal ethicsis a complex and multifaceted field that challenges us to reconsider our relationships with animals. It urges us to move beyond anthropocentric views and recognize the moral significance of animal suffering and well-being. Whether in agriculture, research, entertainment, or as pets, our treatment of animals reflects our broader ethical values and principles. By engaging with the debates and principles of animal ethics, we can work towards a more compassionate and just world for all sentient beings.

[cathartidae]

sorry for asking you this and treating you like an is this animal video cute blog (tell me if i should quit it) but is this video

https://www.tumblr.com/lainska/752300735677562880/alexaloraetheris-babyanimalgifs-why-is-my

ethical? bc i thought it was cute at first but now im not so sure?

first of all. i love being treated like an is the animal video cute blog. i used to actually have a url saved for that but typically i just designate it to my beasts blog these days, but dwdw i dont mind

short answer: yes! this video is ethical! long answer: sort.. of?

while the otter does appear relaxed & happy and does get rewarded in the video, without the original source (which im having trouble finding) i can't tell you whether this guy is in a rehab/wildlife center/zoo/etc or being kept as a pet, so i cant fully verify that it's 100% safe and good :(

what i can say is that in this video, the otter appears relaxed and to my eyes seems like a happy animal :)