#we don't have an opt-out of the whole cycle of predation and we aren't better than it or apart from it

[queen-susans-revenge]

Huh, I've kept chickens and I put a single human at about uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh a hundred chickens? Just in terms of like, general person-ness and likability and intelligence. Maybe a thousand. Chickens can be very winsome! God, I could go lower. TBH I would murder a person for just one chicken that I liked well enough, much like John Wick and his dog. Haven't seen those movies yet, but I have to imagine they'd be improved with chickens!

@alexanderrm​, we did the fractional moral weight thing last year; as with the infamous dust speck argument, giving any moral worth to chickens allows you to overpower humanity by assembling a sufficient number of them and threatening to make the world’s biggest plate of wings. From last year:

I would like to publicly state that I would not kill a single person to save any number of chickens. Utilitarian consequentalists who disagree and wish to bite that bullet can do so in the notes.

A couple of people did bite that bullet and indicated they would trade a random human life for a certain (large) integer number of chicken lives.

Note: this question assumes the chickens are bred specifically for the purposes of this thought experiment and has no impact on the overall chicken species or anything else outside the thought experiment.

It’s basically a trolley problem, but the second track has like a billion chooks.