Animal Minds & Moral Truths: A Conversation with Peter Singer (Episode

Рет қаралды 62,170

Күн бұрын

Sam Harris speaks with Peter Singer about important problems in ethics. They discuss his career as a philosopher, the moral status of non-human animals, the ethics of moral hierarchies, speciesism, the scale of animal suffering, conscientious omnivores, animal experimentation, the tragic case of Sam Bankman-Fried, concerns about Effective Altruism, the problems with focusing on existential risk, the comparative nature of human suffering, the work of Derek Parfit, objective morality, and other topics.
Peter Singer, dubbed “the world’s most influential living philosopher” by The New Yorker, has written, co-authored, edited, or co-edited more than 50 books in over 25 languages, including Practical Ethics, Writings on an Ethical Life, The Life You Can Save, and more. His 1975 book Animal Liberation is often credited with starting the modern animal rights movement. His TED Talk has over 2.25 million views.
Singer was educated at the University of Melbourne and the University of Oxford and is currently the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University's Center for Human Values. When not teaching at Princeton, he lives in Melbourne, Australia, with his wife, Renata, with whom he enjoys hiking. He is also the author of Animal Liberation Now: The Definitive Classic Renewed (Harper; May 23, 2023) and The Buddhist and the Ethicist: Conversations on Effective Altruism, Engaged Buddhism, and How to Build a Better World (Shambhala; December 12, 2023).
Website: petersinger.info/
Twitter: @PeterSinger
November 27, 2023
SUBSCRIBE to gain access to all full-length episodes of the podcast at samharris.org/subscribe/ OR become a channel member to access episodes on KZfaq. For those who can't afford the full subscription price, we offer full and partial scholarships www.samharris.org/subscribe/s...
Subscribe to the YT channel: kzfaq.info_c...
Follow Making Sense on Twitter: / makingsensehq
Follow Sam on Facebook: / samharrisorg
Follow Sam on Instagram: / samharrisorg
For more information about Sam Harris: www.samharris.org

Пікірлер: 739

@radscorpion8 8 ай бұрын

We can and should have basic animal rights laws for farm animals. The idea that kicking or throwing a dog down a flight of stairs, for example, provokes so much rage in the minds of the public, while cows, chickens and pigs are subject to extremely painful conditions in their stalls, and extremely painful deaths, just makes no sense whatsoever. This is one of those issues where the public opinion is so irrational you wonder if something is seriouisly mentally wrong with us as a species.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

Dogs are domesticated pets that hold a direct and personal bond with the owner. Dogs have oxytocin firing in parts of the brain associated with love and understanding its owners mannerisms and voice, this is THE distinction. It would be MORE morally wrong to domesticate a type of species then kick them down the stairs or inhabit suffering compared to a cow or pig. We can argue that place of ethical moral hierarchies but you cant deny there objective place in reality. Would you argue CO2 Gas Procedures are contingent with your analysis of "extremely painful deaths" ?

@KrwiomoczBogurodzicy 8 ай бұрын

“Giving farm animals more space, more natural environments, more companions does not right the fundamental wrong [treating them as resources], any more than giving lab animals more anaesthesia or bigger, cleaner cages would right the fundamental wrong in their case.” - Tom Regan, _The Case for Animal Rights_ “If you really care about animals, then stop trying to figure out how to exploit them ‘compassionately’. Just stop exploiting them.” - Gary Francione

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

The fact that the online public was ready to crucify West Ham Football Pro for kicking his Cat, probably while munching on a bucket of Chicken Wings, tells you everything you need to know about the cognitive dissonance people have towards this topic.

@strathdee8825 8 ай бұрын

Insanity in individuals is rare, in groups it's the rule.

@CanariasCanariass 8 ай бұрын

@@nathanmitchell7961 There is no objective morality. Kicking a cow or a pig is just as bad as kicking a dog. There is no difference except our attachment to dogs for example.

@veganmeathead8171 8 ай бұрын

Thank you for having this conversation. These are really important questions which get to the heart of our consciousness.

@nadoelik 8 ай бұрын

Thank you for this interview , and shedding some light on the biggest crime ever committed by humanity against sentient beings.

@LinkEX 8 ай бұрын

I know you are referring to the animal experiments. But depending on how you define the scope of a crime, you might as well change the tense to present continuous for our current animal agriculture.

@nadoelik 8 ай бұрын

@@LinkEX I am referring to both

@nevis4567 8 ай бұрын

Thank you for that wording. How wild is it that the biggest crime being committed on nonhuman animals is still treated as such a minority issue. It's hard to imagine decades from now we won't evoke parallels to slavery/civil rights/women's rights/children's rights/LGBTQ+ rights for not collectively eliminating this injustice with the moral force it requires.

@nadoelik 8 ай бұрын

@@nevis4567 We have the perfect victims, those who can't speak.

@krishnaveganathar 8 ай бұрын

@@nevis4567decades from now? We are doing it now. And we have been doing it for decades. From the animals’ perspective, humans are evil monsters.

@patrowan7206 7 ай бұрын

I recently watched and listened in horror as a sparrow screamed in agony while being torn apart by a hawk. The sounds were indistinguishable from what a human with a bird's voice might make, and I can no longer dismiss the suffering as that of a lesser being.

@stevenpham6734 3 ай бұрын

If you think they can suffer as much as us (which there is no good evidence to prove otherwise), then at what ground do you define them as lesser beings than us? Intelligence? Is there such a definition written in the laws of nature?

@wvhollargirl7549 8 ай бұрын

I understand all too well the plight of animals in our current first world culture. The more those who are aware educate, the more we can change the culture. Peter Singer is an example of an animal rights hero.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

Why does he not have viceral reaction to insect being killed if most things are equal in terms of its suffering?

@erikdahlstrom3561 8 ай бұрын

@@nathanmitchell7961 why would you think the suffering of an insect would be equal to a cow?

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

Because the logic is "All lives are of equal value, its the suffering we should focus on"@@erikdahlstrom3561

@Brandon-os3qr Ай бұрын

@@nathanmitchell79616 months later, but in case you're curious as to the answer, it's the notion that "capacity for suffering" might be a spectrum as opposed to JUST a yes/no. So essentially: - is a particular being worthy of moral consideration = are they capable of suffering AND ALSO - HOW MUCH moral consideration should we give to a particular being = how MUCH suffering are they capable of And what's discussed in the parts you refer to is how there are still SOME question marks

@nathanmitchell7961 Ай бұрын

@@erikdahlstrom3561 Why is it not

@evidencebased1 8 ай бұрын

I was most struck by Sam’s point that the success of the “suffering” experiments depends on how analogous the animal minds are to our own, and if that is the case then how can we say with confidence that we are not torturing them?

@gabrielgaidos7015 7 ай бұрын

"suffering experiments" are not allowed. Only physiological experiments are allowed and if pain is involved, anesthesia is mandatory.

@haaendaaz3619 7 ай бұрын

How can we, or anyone, say in confidence that we are hurting anyone? Everything we know is the result of chemicals and electrical impulses. We could be a brain in a jar for all we know, or super drugged up, or whatever. But we don’t. We don’t know that for sure. So we act in an ethical, respectful manner to all to prevent these “what if” hypotheticals. Think about the time in history people didn’t do that and horrors such as the Arab slave trade, chattel American slavery, genocidal wars, pillaging and raping, war time rapes, war as an entity, etc have been propagated in society.

@Jack458111 8 ай бұрын

Quit messing around and get Alex O’Connor on the podcast.

@arklowrockz 8 ай бұрын

The time of the KZfaq Atheist is passed. Thank God. No need for Alex O'Connor.

@KellyLCornell 8 ай бұрын

This is a topic I struggle with so much because it's so important to me but I can hardly even listen to animal welfare conversations because I get so emotional/ enraged.

@Brandon-os3qr Ай бұрын

Enraged by what?

@louisjones2653 8 ай бұрын

This was a great conversation, I studied some of Singer's work in college and was significantly influenced by it.

@antitheistvegan 8 ай бұрын

Rational skepticism is a natural route to Veganism. I just wish more of us would make the connection.

@William1w1 8 ай бұрын

Or a route to deciding we really should be able to eat babies. That's the side I fall on. Babies in a vacuum, mind you. Wouldn't want the mother to get upset.

@Frodoswaggns 8 ай бұрын

Exactly how I turned vegan, plus my hypocritical ass could not stomach watching what I was paying for in the movie Dominion.

@firvantavan2793 8 ай бұрын

Why is it more rational to be a vegan than eating a balanced diet?

@Theactivepsychos 8 ай бұрын

Really? I don’t think so. I have to eat meat and other animal products. I’d have such a low quality of life if I didn’t that I’d definitely not carry on. I do find the highest welfare animal farms I can and I do speak to the companies regularly to find out any changes in their practises.

@patodesudesu 8 ай бұрын

@@firvantavan2793 Because if you care about wellbeing you are probably making lots of animals suffer. I mean but if you don't care about suffering not really. Rationality doesn't give you things to value outside instrumental ones. Personally I'm happy to have learned a way I can reduce suffering in the world.

@andrewferrier3351 8 ай бұрын

Sam always coming through with the topics I’ve been looking at just when I want them

@wade2bosh 8 ай бұрын

will sam speak out against kosher and halal? - animal torture

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

Standard killing practices in the Western World are equally abhorrent. Killing should not happen. Full stop.

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

He has before.

@blackbeard479 8 ай бұрын

Peter Singer: DON'T throw another shrimp on the barbie

@ethanstapley7018 2 ай бұрын

Shrimps are probably OK. The biggest meat eater conundrum is the difference between a very young baby vs a pig. Shrimps are good as gold, they don't care.

@Brandon-os3qr Ай бұрын

@@ethanstapley7018 so the shrimp welfare initiatives that exist are based on what? You're saying there's scientific evidence that they don't suffer?

@Jack458111 8 ай бұрын

Rational Sam Harris fans lose their god damn minds when someone points out how obviously fucked up human treatment of animals is.

@nevis4567 8 ай бұрын

There's a lot of misinformation and values of human supremacy to undo... sadly it's gonna take some time, but I'm glad the podcast will help

@paullampl1 8 ай бұрын

People love morality up until the point where their own lifestyle comes into question.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

@@paullampl1we‘re ready to let the world burn for bacon it seems

@phoenixfire8226 8 ай бұрын

@@nevis4567 It's objectively true that we are the supreme species on planet earth. To say otherwise is abject ignorance. That said, in my estimation, we should use our position of superiority to do good works for lesser species. Just because I can easily squish an ant, doesn't mean I should.

@dystopiaeatsmoney 8 ай бұрын

So you agree that might doesn’t make right?

@hafman715 7 ай бұрын

Thank you for this. It’s the most neglected aspect of our inhumanity.

@drybie 8 ай бұрын

Thank you. Great discussion.

@kaylawatson8540 8 ай бұрын

PETER SINGER IS AN ANGEL ON EARTH. ❤ I love him so much #veganforever

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

Peter Singer is an utilitarian prick. Not vegan by the way.

@reedclippings8991 8 ай бұрын

If there's something that it's like to be you, then your interests deserve consideration. The only way to live consistently with this idea, in the real world, the current one, is to be vegan. However hard you think it is. It's like 40% that hard.

@erikdahlstrom3561 8 ай бұрын

10% that hard, its not very hard if you are in a first world country and above the poverty line, especially if you are in/near a city.

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@erikdahlstrom3561 In my experience it's much easier to cook vegan and much easier to shop vegan, but I'm not sure how common my fortune is for having brands upon brands of vegan protein products in every grocer I visit.

@billscannell93 8 ай бұрын

Examples like the completely braindead baby, while interesting to debate, are rather obscure. For the purpose of simplicity, we should just keep the goal in mind of minimizing suffering whenever possible. The main topic here is inhumanity towards developed, healthy creatures. While there are potentially odd little paradoxes in the argument, they don't have much to do with the main thrust of what Singer is saying. Anyway, Singer IS saying that all humans should be treated with the same respect. His point is that the humanness of a being does not, by itself, determine the extent to which the being should be treated humanely. That whole tangent about checking guns was basically a warning against slippery slopes, and I don't see a slippery slope here. No one is going to go from "we should treat other sentient beings better and think of animal lives differently" to "let's somehow flip that to bring back Nazi medicine."

@user-zt6uu5tw9j 8 ай бұрын

Peter made an excellent point about the resource expenditure involved when offering Humanitarian aid between class societal structures. Another point this podcast episode brings up for me is the cognitive dissonance between the acquisition of knowledge and the pro-activism from it [response]. I read an animal rights book titled Chimps of the Fauna Sanctuary, which caused fundamental change within my value system. I am still proudly moved to live my life as a response to becoming more enlightened on the subject.

@ChrisJWinn 8 ай бұрын

My kids have been vegan for 6 years from age 3 and 6. My son starts high school this year in an accelerated learning class(top 20% of that class) and plays for 3 soccer teams. Don't believe the people who say it's child abuse to have vegan kids.

@maximilliancunningham6091 8 ай бұрын

I stopped eating meat, in the early 90s, too.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

Your kids didnt choose anything, stop forcing your lacking diet onto your own children who cant agree to it, youll be the first people look at when your kids suffer from nutrient deficiencies

@ChrisJWinn 8 ай бұрын

@@maximilliancunningham6091why'd you stop?

@dystopiaeatsmoney 8 ай бұрын

⁠Take of your blinkers and try to engage with the conversation. Your wilful ignorance reflects poorly on you and humanity at large.

@arambarsamian6312 8 ай бұрын

Feeding your children the most nutrient-dense foods on the planet - plants - is certainly not child abuse. Feeding them animal products is certainly - whether one realizes it or not - animal abuse.

@VimDoozy 8 ай бұрын

It always makes me grin a little when the outro music starts to play as the volume of the guest's voice gradually fades. It's like when an award recipient is taking to long to wrap up their acceptance speech. It's like, "You've had your moment, Peter. Be on your own way."

@drudiogenes8544 8 ай бұрын

But really it's non-subscribers being told to be on our own way.. 🤣

@Ritch98777 8 ай бұрын

This is a brilliant conversation - measured arguments and healthy debate

@JohnPritzlaff 8 ай бұрын

Man I love this podcast. Cleaning my truck under extreme duress and this is just *chef's kiss* *muah* perfect 😅

@nirvonna 8 ай бұрын

I wish that it was restated where one could find the conversation between Peter Singer and the female Buddhist monastic from Thailand at the end of that discussion. I became interested as I listened and hoped that information would be offered at the end of that bit. I’m having a hard time finding it. Can anyone help?

@rimburemus7587 8 ай бұрын

it's an upcoming book soon to be published: the buddhist and the ethicist

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

I cannot speak for vegans generally but what makes me angry / sad / disappointed is not that people don’t care, but that some come up with the same bad arguments over and over again.

@lucioh1575 8 ай бұрын

Why aren't you vegan? Not trying to be confrontational. Trying to make you think.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

@@lucioh1575 of course I am, I have been for years

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

⁠@@domsnow6418Then you can speak for vegans. With one mention: ethics should be the main focus.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

@@vasisimari92058 nah, i tend not no speak for other people just because they share one single value. I tend to avoid tribalism like the plague. But myself yes, i am a vegan for ethical reasons

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

@@domsnow6418 every comment is a form of vegan activism and being an activist means you speak for the vegans. Activism has nothing to do with tribalism. You don't wanna fall into the pick-me-vegan trap, which is very convenient for anti-vegans.

@sirmaumur4056 7 ай бұрын

A very good discussion… the one major thing to add is the pain of those who are left behind when some one is dead. It is not only the pain nor the death of the individual. That is why the example of the cephalic baby feels shocking. Some animals feel the pain when a loved animal dies, baboons, whales, dogs…. But it is not true for many. I believe this adds to the hierarchy of species significantly…

@Andrea-zm1nl 8 ай бұрын

Thank you for having this discussion. This is important for people to hear. I would like to say that agriculture is conducted in an unethical way no matter whether it is plants or animals being grown and harvested. Yes animals are treated horribly and this should be stopped. But we also need to address the number of plants and animals that are extincted or put in danger of extinction each year by the human practice of cleaning entire ecosystems off of a piece of land for the purpose of growing one crop there. Or how about the fact that each animal and plant we eat daily is actually a species that humans have enslaved and or genetically modified to suit our own purposes. We need to face the fact that the only ethical way to eat three meals a day is to have your own garden and keep your own animals.

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

The healthiest & most balanced way to get food is that which rejuvenates the ecosystem. Regenerative farming & pastured animals are way better than every home having animals. But your general instinct is a good one.

@Andrea-zm1nl 8 ай бұрын

@@bryanutility9609 I almost agree. The healthiest way for you and the environment is to hunt and trap and fish for only enough meat for your family and grow your own veggies and fruits in your own backyard. That way you actually have to get up and exercise and work for your food like you evolved to do. This is also a sustainable way for the environment, and because so many people are not capable of doing it it would result in a drastic reduction of the numbers of our super destructive species. (Not that I think this will happen of course)

@olivermaier-landshut3047 8 ай бұрын

I really like this philosophy.

@Kar0n 7 ай бұрын

I know this episode is about animals but since it touches a lot on effective altruism I'm curios how you reconcile your views on effective altruism and utilitarianism while considering the number of "collateral" civilians killed the latest conflict.

@6ygfddgghhbvdx 8 ай бұрын

34:41 Sam still loves his food more than life and suffering of animals. Hypocracy among humans are immesarable!

@KrwiomoczBogurodzicy 8 ай бұрын

“Naked had I once seen both of them, the greatest man and the smallest man: all too like one another-all too human, even the greatest man! All too small, even the greatest man!-that was my disgust at man! And the eternal return also of the smallest man!-that was my disgust at all existence! Ah, Disgust! Disgust! Disgust!”-Thus spake Zarathustra, and sighed and shuddered; for he remembered his sickness.” - Nietzsche, _Thus Spake Zarathustra_

@Frodoswaggns 8 ай бұрын

Explain this @@KrwiomoczBogurodzicy

@joshyman221 8 ай бұрын

@@Frodoswaggnsall humans are humans and are susceptible to flaws of human nature.

@TrackinDaMeta 8 ай бұрын

The points regarding the torture of animals were spot on. Terrible stuff

@mimetype 8 ай бұрын

I've seen what the Chinese routinely do to dogs, gives me nightmares.

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

Fuck welfarism, vegans are abolitionists. We have the non-vegans to take care of welfarism n squabble amongst each other.

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

@@mimetypewhat's the moral difference between a dog and a pig ? Or a cow? A lamb? A chicken?

@mimetype 8 ай бұрын

@@vasisimari92058 Pigs, Cows, Lambs and Chicken aren't routinely thrown alive into boiling oil, to emerge still alive screaming in agony.

@vasisimari92058 8 ай бұрын

@@mimetype you don't know shit about standard practices in the Animal Industry. Obviously youtube is on your side, 'cause they delete my comment every time I try to describe it.

@erniehudson1 8 ай бұрын

Very important subject!

@busydying 8 ай бұрын

Don Hoffman's perception-as-an-interface theory gives an interesting view on inferring amount of suffering by number of a specie neurons. It says that we rather have a simpler "portal" to a betle consciousness than one to a dog's one. So the number of neurons correlates rather with complexity of a portal than with "real" complexity of the creature. And the complexity of the portal in turn depends on how much of it we need in terms of optimizing evolutionary "fitness points".

@Eric-ot7en 8 ай бұрын

This talk really struck me. Animals feel pain like we do. I’m 20 min in. I’m out too much to handle

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

So what if animals feel pain? What in life justifies pain is what you should ask? Life requires death. It’s just physics. Embrace it. Don’t let some nerd charlatan emotionally manipulate you with abstractions. Say yes to life!

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@bryanutility9609 Death is different from pain though, death is not suffering. Suffering is horrible, if it weren't then you wouldn't try to avoid suffering. Whenever suffering can be avoided or alleviated we should try our bests to avoid or alleviate it.

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

@@ToweringToska The risk of suffering is the only thing that gives you the ability to do good deeds, by definition. Every time I go to the dentist I refuse to use anesthetic because embracing the pain makes me a stronger person. Not sure how you separate pain and suffering other than it’s a mindset and that can be overcome through attitude. The only place there is zero pain & suffering while dead. If that is your goal then you are pro-death.

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@bryanutility9609 You're a wild one, metal as fuck! : > Not everyone likes suffering though. Another thing is there are scales, the suffering of not eating for a few days for instance is I think a fine experience, the suffering of a mentally disabled person living 30 years in a household with a monstrously abusive parent however, not so helpful in the grand scheme of things! Scale again, pain is helpful to staying alive and that's why we all got it, sure. But its whole purpose is to be avoided, to show us what we SHOULDN'T let happen to ourselves. Pain isn't just there for you to enjoy BDSM, it's there to tell us when there's a problem. XD And people put animals through lots of horribly problematic circumstances, causing them extreme pain. That answer your "So what?" question sufficiently? Hope so.

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

@@ToweringToska Most people are not living lives of balance. They will avoid exercise because it’s hard but endure obesity which is suffering. It’s a matter of balance, of sacrifice let’s say. And it’s people who want a world without sacrifice who are “other worldly”. I don’t respect that. You can call it scale sure. As far as scale goes you could say “unnecessary suffering”.

@traviswadezinn 8 ай бұрын

Important topic - good episode

@roadrunner9622 6 ай бұрын

Growing up in the 1970's/80's, the idea "animals can't feel pain" was accepted by a significant part of the population.

@davidwatson2399 5 ай бұрын

And it was wrong

@ruzg 8 ай бұрын

Awesome

@MassMultiplayer 8 ай бұрын

thx for talking about this

@herbivorizepredators1074 8 ай бұрын

If a being has a good life do they not then have an interest and desire to continue to live that we have no right to thwart and in fact have a positive duty to protect?

@QuixoticIgnotism 8 ай бұрын

Love you Sam

@Finite8614 8 ай бұрын

The notion that certain groups are treated or act "like animals" often carries an underlying assumption of human superiority. This brings up an important question: does this presumed superiority extend to our morals and ethics?

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

100% these nerds aren’t moral they’re justifying their petty weakness and desire for pathetic comfort. They are rabbits amongst lions.

@lm58142 8 ай бұрын

The more I know children, the more I love rats.

@RyuBateson218 8 ай бұрын

Thanks!

@user-oy4fy6yv2e 5 ай бұрын

There can be a way to break bias in social media and reduce the power of people with large followers to influence opinion on social media platforms. Similar to comments section, we can add a views (viewpoints or connections or context) section - Where anyone can add any view related to the post and people can like and react to the view just like the post. Context 1/ #keyword combo : specific context to the post in limited words like in twitter Context 2 : Most important part of the context section could be checking the balance b/w different context as a percentage or in a pie chart. This distribution could tell if the discussion is biased or balanced, majorititarian view or nuanced. Multiple inferences could be drawn from the distribution of context, views, sides or connections.

@freeMinder 8 ай бұрын

Thank you

@sunnyinvladivostok 8 ай бұрын

When we have a cost-effective option for lab-grown meat, itll be hard to justify any kind of animal farming / consumption

@rasputozen 8 ай бұрын

I've got great news! You don't need to eat meat for protein or any nutrient. You can get all of the nutrition found in meat (and more) from beans, legumes, mushrooms, grains, nuts, seeds, veggies and fruit.

@ChrisJWinn 8 ай бұрын

I argue it's hard to justify now. Most people just seem 100% determined to eat murdered animals for taste pleasure. Seems extremely shallow imho.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

There will probably still be some underground rings of people who prefer to eat the „real deal“

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

@@feklar3470 let‘s hope so 👏🏻

@sunnyinvladivostok 8 ай бұрын

@@rasputozen you don't need to convince me of that, you need to convince 8 billion others on the planet. Lab meat is more viable

@Jules-Is-a-Guy 8 ай бұрын

Sam, I have a rndm suggestion, pls have on George Will.

@krunkle5136 8 ай бұрын

Singer is a telescopic philanthropist. As beautiful as effective altruism is, it advocates unwitting stakeless aid, and a theory that humans are interchangeable.

@yuumbaalam 8 ай бұрын

I can't understand how he can still laugh at having steak while having a conversation with Peter SInger about animal right, it's unfathomable to me....

@peteMickeal33 8 ай бұрын

deep down sam knows animal rights are bullshit.

@remyleo 8 ай бұрын

I don't know how it happened, but i came here thinking this was an Animals fighting back video by Ozzy Man. Like drinking OJ when you thought it was milk.

@realcommonsense23 8 ай бұрын

Thanks, Making sense is Common sense!

@IsitReallyrealreally 8 ай бұрын

‘Absolute Necessities’ are not the world most live in. And, really, for many, it is.

@nias3202 8 ай бұрын

💚💚💚

@OhManTFE 8 ай бұрын

Please comment on Ayaan Hirsi Ali now identifying as some type of christian???

@theflyingdutchman_01 8 ай бұрын

just imagine if humans had never existed, or would perish all of a sudden… nature would be so much in balance… all living things would have been, or would be, so much better off without us… the 100 or so billion of us that have existed up to now have inflicted so much pain and suffering on other living things… shame on us for eternity…

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

I imagine that a lot, I dream of circumstances like that. I appreciate your compassionate words and empathize, living in this forlorn world, driven to love and protect all the fragile beautiful things that we can hardly ever save and can never hold onto for long. You are nice though, you deserve to feel good about that at least. Thanks for trying. ^ ^

@theflyingdutchman_01 8 ай бұрын

when you speak about what the N@z!s did to the Jews, you might want to also look into “Unit 731” in Russia, or human vivisection camps in Japan (and more importantly, how the Americans dealt with this issue after the war)… just to make a point as to what kind of cruelties humans are capable of inflicting on other living creatures, NOT only on animals… and it wasNOT only the N@z!s !!!

@smartbart80 8 ай бұрын

”The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

@unsilencedderp9411 8 ай бұрын

26:20 people actually do have OCD when it comes to pointing guns at things.

@ericb2017 8 ай бұрын

fuck I can barely finish this. it’s infuriating. do I really have what it takes to become an animal activist? I mean if there’s one thing in life that pisses me off it’s animal cruelty, but what do I really do about it, ever?

@rasputozen 8 ай бұрын

Stop eating them and their secretions for a start.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

It hurts, that much is true. Just do what you can mate, no one is ever gonna be perfect.

@lucioh1575 8 ай бұрын

Hey Eric, I can definitely recommend different ways through which you can help animals, including street outreach. Reply if you're interested. :)

@arambarsamian6312 8 ай бұрын

@@domsnow6418it’s not about perfection. But simple choices we make several times a day have a profound affect on individual animals. If we eat bacon and eggs for breakfast, chicken for lunch, and steak for dinner, that’s ordering the killing of a pig, a chicken and the male chicks that are a causality of the egg industry, and a cow. Or one can eat plants and thus abstain from ordering the killing of those individuals, thus decreasing the demand that other animals take their place.

@bertt_y 8 ай бұрын

Snowball effect, plant a seed, use whatever metaphor you want.. but if you live a good vegan life, the people will around you will see, you can speak up about it.. The longer I'm vegan the more I feel the sense of urgency to speak up for the animals and let people know we can live a healthier longer life eating a whole foods plant based diet, and logically, for the planet.. we feed 80 billion land animals food and fresh water.. yet there's still getting on for a billion starving people on earth.. we could free up 75% if the world switched to a plant based diet.. we could rewild many parts of the world, grow tons of food and still have enough room for the ever expanding humankind. If we can, we should.

@erowan1389 8 ай бұрын

Glad to see tgia conversation, but I was only able to hear the short version. I am not in agreement that torturing an animal is ever juatified to save a human. Knowing all vertebrates, many invertebrates, and possibly all animals feel pain equates to unethical and immoral action when one knowingly and intentionally causes another pain. I heard no rationale for ranking the pain of a human as being more important than the pain of a mouse or an ant. Arguing that humans can consider their mortality does not apply to a human child, and is irrelevant to the experience of pain. There is no justifiable reason for humans to cause pain in one innocent animal to relieve pain in another, even themselves or their kids. Self-defense against an opponent is the only exception, but even that does not mean torture or slavery should ever be allowed. Turturing mice to prevent cancer or other afflictions in humans is an abomination and needs to stop.

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

I just wanna say that you are as right as you possibly could be about this and your rational properly empathetic take did a great job of reminding me that people aren't all unfixably horrible. ^__^ *veggytarian who's rescued bugs and dogs since he was single digits old and aches inside for animals all over the world enough to greatly impact his health*

@mattpierce5009 8 ай бұрын

"There is no justifiable reason for humans to cause pain in one innocent animal to relieve pain in another, even themselves or their kids" You're a monster.

@missshroom5512 5 ай бұрын

I’m with Sam…where in the world are they getting interns or anyone for that matter to perform these experiments

@bigfish1138 8 ай бұрын

Why does no one consider intent and an individuals potential for change (whether influenced by internal or external recommendation) when attempting to determine right from wrong. I love these conversations that Sam has because he is so consistent with his "grey area" logic. The truth is always somewhere inbetween the extremes in the vast majority of topics. If suffering is the basis for the argument against ever consuming or utilizing animals, then you have to accept that there are ways to give creatures an amazing life that would otherwise not have existed and terminate there life in a stress free process. A beef cow raised in the mountains of Montana is not equivalent to the horrors of large corporations raising pigs and chickens using unthinkable meathods. A bug that dies immediately after being hit by a car has no suffering and can't be compared to factory farming. Cruelty and profit driven ideals is the problem. Being kind and considerate and using rationality and common sense is the solution.

@erowan1389 8 ай бұрын

No one said there isnn't a spectrum. Yeah, some are much worse than others but it is never ok to intentionally cause pain in an animal.

@bigfish1138 8 ай бұрын

Absolutely. It just seemed there are times when apples and oranges are compared with zero desire to compromise that there is no universal right and wrong.

@scottclifford5093 8 ай бұрын

I thought - aah! Atom Heart Mother by Pink Floyd

@sockinvaders 8 ай бұрын

It seems to me the natural world cares little about suffering. Its an immensely cruel world where most beings are trying to eat other beings, mostly while alive. We have come along and spread a desire to not cause pain. And for the most part we've improved on nature. But where we fail terribly is in factory farming where creatured are born into a most dystopian reality. Born to imprisoned mothers, kept permanently in the control of their captors. I think most of us would agree that a quick death is preferable to being imprisoned and forced to give birth to children who will be taken away and eaten by our captors. Whenever we come across something like this in the news, where someone has been held for decades in a basement, these are the most shocking stories. I dont disagree with eating meat. But i think we owe it to every creature to have a full life. To be in nature, to compete and have a normal life. And becoming our food only at the end of a full life.

@jeremytan739 8 ай бұрын

Have we improved on nature when climate change and habitat destruction is killing more animals than every non-human predators ever could?

@d0lvl0 8 ай бұрын

Why become food at all? Why can't we just eat a fully healthy diet made up of non-sentient life instead?

@sockinvaders 8 ай бұрын

we've improved on the survival of the fittest, cruelty that has existed for millenia and would exist more if not for us. We've managed to create societies where most of us wont be eaten unexpectedly, we wont be murdered randomly on the street, we can live long, happy lives and die at old age. and we've applied these principles to dogs, cats and other creatures that thrive in our world. If you study human societies over the last few thousands years, you can see clear progress. Unfortunately technology has created nightmare dystopias for many of our farm animals. @@jeremytan739

@sockinvaders 8 ай бұрын

why would we? Meat tastes amazing. And for good reason. My dogs eat meat. My family pet cats ate meat. Lions eat meat. Sharks eat meat. Orcas eat meat. dolphins eat meat. I see no moral reason why we shouldnt eat meat. But given what we know, there's a moral incentive to minimise pain and suffering to those things we eat. I won't eat lamb for example or fois gras out of principle, or halal which sounds truly horrendous. @@d0lvl0

@nevis4567 8 ай бұрын

Seems to me like "we owe it to every creature to have a full life" and purchasing meat or hunting are contradictory statements. I think we haven't fully grasped that as a species.

@ansarikashif7 7 ай бұрын

What I wonder about Sam is he is discussing suffering of Animals and has not said a word of unimaginable human suffering currently being inflicted upon Gazans. Being an Achiest he has favored one religion over other and that raises a lot of questions on his philosophy.

@erowan1389 8 ай бұрын

Who said an animal is "happy" living in captivity on a hobby farm? Animals have instincts and urges to roam, breed and interact within their own species groups. I would rather be a wild animal and face the hardships among my kin than in a zoo and stuck with cellmates I may hate.

@dawn8542 8 ай бұрын

I was a big Sam Harris fan. I watched him Debate William Lane Craig at the University of Notre Dame about religion. I was reading and watching everything I could by him and the 4 horsemen. And was traveling to see many scientists talk against religion and the idea of a god. It was, to me about right vs wrong. And science. I feel the exact same way about veganism. I have several activities that I listen to. And to hear Sam's opinion on the welfare of animals has made me lose all respect for the man. Once again, we are talking about the social issues of the times. And Sam is on the wrong side of history. Same with Neil Degrasse Tyson. What a fucking shame.

@niche657 7 ай бұрын

The actual shame is people like you failing to understand his reasoning. As, if you’d understood it, this comment wouldn’t have been written

@edusch 7 ай бұрын

@@niche657it is really easy to understand his reasoning. Basically all vegans had this reasoning before turning vegan. Easy to understand, but difficult to agree. It is morally blind

@charlesjohnson364 8 ай бұрын

Debate V E G A N G A I N S

@CaptainFuzzbottom 8 ай бұрын

I would subscribe for that.

@migarsormrapophis2755 8 ай бұрын

lol

@wetyuu 8 ай бұрын

😂

@JaromEubanks 8 ай бұрын

There are better vegan debaters out there.

@Genghis_Sean_ 8 ай бұрын

Dr Avi or Nutrivore would fucking decimate Sam

@fahidcharkaoui612 8 ай бұрын

@jafco9 8 ай бұрын

Speaking of being objective about effective altruism, are you able to make an objective argument that altruism is a valid moral principle?

@Brandon-os3qr Ай бұрын

Singer literally has an entire book on his answer to this question. But for Harris, it's also not difficult to combine his positions on moral objectivity to get an answer. He states that well-being is the foundation of objective morality, with the whole "the most objective definition of bad is a world where the least desired outcome happens to all of the beings." This very quickly turns into some form of utilitarianism where increasing overall well-being is a "good" outcome, and then clearly supports altruism as an objective moral principle at least IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES where there is a net increase in well-being. Which is to say that chopping your arm off to feed someone who could have eaten oatmeal might technically be altruistic, but not morally "good" within that objective framework. This also speaks to the moral component of being effective with said altruism

@jafco9 Ай бұрын

@Brandon-os3qr You're making a glaringly big assumption that altruism can lead to a net increase in overall well-being.

@Brandon-os3qr Ай бұрын

@@jafco9 I literally said "in the circumstances where it would." You could argue it's something other than altruism if it doesn't, or you could argue it's this combined sentiment that is the moral good by whatever name you give it.

@jafco9 29 күн бұрын

@Brandon-os3qr, are you arguing that there are circumstances where altruism can be objectively good?

@Brandon-os3qr 29 күн бұрын

@@jafco9 those are literally the words I used, yes. Again, whether you tie those circumstances into the definition of altruism, or otherwise for the purpose of universal application claim that the combination of altruism and the circumstances is the objective moral good (by whatever name). And above all, I'm saying that this is what Harris' model of moral objectivity (and its foundation of well-being) would imply

@gnubbiersh647 8 ай бұрын

im not sure i can forgive chickens for being speciesist against worms.

@wimsickle6173 8 ай бұрын

You're a chicken

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

But chickens aren't, they're opportunistic by necessity, that's all they've got. : (

@gnubbiersh647 8 ай бұрын

@@ToweringToska same as humans

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@gnubbiersh647 ...No? Please pay attention. We have grocery stores, we have plenty of options all the time. If we choose to hurt others when we don't need to, which we don't, then we're subjugating others and telling ourselves it's okay because they're different. Humans ignoring other animals' feelings so they can kill them is what we call specism, it's a thing we can have, or much preferably choose not to have. Chickens meanwhile live in a much tinier world with so much fewer options that they've basically got none. A chicken is not prejudice for eating worms, shut that up, it's embarrassing to try to justify stupidity by saying other exponentially less intelligent and privileged animals do it too. Even if you're just miming another dumb comment you heard and feel detached and impersonal from it, the truth is it's you, you are everything you say, we are nothing but what we put out there. Try to be compassionate whenever you're walking into an argument you don't care about, because you don't know how much this matters.

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@gnubbiersh647 Daw that was really mean, tahah, sorry, if you're a kid that beating probably sucked. Definitely try to be accountable though, stand up for what's right and respect everyone else who does too.

@strathdee8825 8 ай бұрын

This is a completely moral blind spot for almost every civilisation throughout history. There is just simply no reason that most of us should consume (almost) any animal product whatsoever.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

Maybe the Inuit or sth, but certainly not people with access to supermarkets

@lucioh1575 8 ай бұрын

You should go vegan.

@strathdee8825 8 ай бұрын

@@lucioh1575 I am.

@lucioh1575 8 ай бұрын

Awesome, same. @@strathdee8825

@Woof45 8 ай бұрын

Meat tastes good, vegetables don't fill me.

@migarsormrapophis2755 8 ай бұрын

"We can't be certain that insects feel pain" - Singer. Wow, really lost me right there. Bees, the specific example Sam gave, are capable of linguistic displacement (the ability to communicate abstract information about concepts that are distant in time or space). The idea that there's a reasonable doubt that they're 'advanced' enough to feel pain is crazy.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

So if we had a burning building with your disabled child inside and your pet chicken, which one are you going to grab?

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

The child of course, even I am that much of s speciecist. Also you‘ll go to jail for letting the child burn.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

Great, so we view human to have higher moral agency then animals.@@domsnow6418

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

I dont see how this is related to my analogy. Too be more specific, in my analogy you are limited on time and restricted to making the moral choice or choosing who to save. A good majority of people, i assume, would save their baby because the baby holds higher moral value than your chicken.@@tomz5700

@lucioh1575 8 ай бұрын

@@nathanmitchell7961 Okay, and? It doesn't justify paying for animal abuse when you get a burger.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

@@lucioh1575 My point is exactly why my analogy is so extreme because its easy to consider vigilant morality when you arent forced or in a pressured complicated moral situation. WE place the value on humans over animals because its the only experience we can relate too.

@dawn8542 8 ай бұрын

Considering Peter isn't an abolitionist, he isn't really helping animals at all and is actually counterproductive. Listen to Gary Francione's speech on that.

@hmmmahroof3602 3 ай бұрын

Few ideas to help animals. 1. Help the developing nations to sterilize stray dogs and cats. 2.stop shipping animals for killing. 3.introduce anaesthesia in animal slaughter. 4.introduce anaesthesia before killing of harmful animals. eg rats 5.ban animal fighting compaigns 6.ban cooking alive any animal

@erowan1389 8 ай бұрын

Every sperm is not sacred. Livestock not being born does not cause suffering to the phantom animal.

@retromograph3893 8 ай бұрын

Problem: organic farms with free-roaming animals are the absolute worst for CO2 emissions, in terms of emissions per each kilo of meat produced..... so although these farms will tick the animal welfare box, they are a disaster for the environment if they become widespread. To be clear, I'm against all meat eating.

@retromograph3893 8 ай бұрын

you forgot to quote (or failed to understand?) the rest of my sentence: " in terms of emissions per each kilo of meat produced" .... so the punchline is that not only is it impossible to meet the world's meat demand through organic methods, it would be a disaster for the planet if you did! The takeaway? Don't eat any meat!@@tamhiker1

@mattersmatter342 8 ай бұрын

28:21 Sam, any other standard would leave us empty because human usefulness is judged subjectively and utility of the moment,. Can't imagine how useful one finds an English professor on a sinking ship compared to the mute carpenter 🤔 Or the Scientists who can't swim to someone drowning? You made great counter arguments during this discussion. On a side note, bugs play too important a role in our ecosystem to make them a preferred food, so meat may be the better option 😢

@rasputozen 8 ай бұрын

Are you aware eating plants is about 10x more efficient from an energy and land/resource usage perspective? What's the nutrient in meat you can't get from plants?

@mattersmatter342 8 ай бұрын

@@rasputozen Maybe for some; however, I have a family member who was advised not to eat meat, so he's a vegetarian now. The contrast in his appearance and energy levels are stark: He's listless.

@rasputozen 8 ай бұрын

Do you really know all of the things he's going through? He might not be getting good sleep. His health condition might be messing with him or some other great stress you don't know about. Maybe his vegetarian diet really isn't well planned and balanced. Or it could be a combination of multiple of these things. Have you inquired about any of this with him, or are you just doing a lot of assuming? But to focus on the greater point, why are you looking at one anecdote to draw a conclusion on ALL plant-based diets? Have you never seen a healthy vegan, in your own life or online? Really? If not maybe you should venture out of your existing circle before you draw such sweeping conclusions.@@mattersmatter342

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@mattersmatter342 It takes practice and research to eat healthy, there's a learning what to shop for and prepare period, it doesn't take meat though. Also bugs are farmed and bred when they're eaten too, they're not scavenged out of natural ecosystems until there aren't any left. It's substantially easier to breed and farm bugs than large animals, they need way less resources. Sticking with just plants beats bugs in every way of course, but bugs still easily beat farming big animals.

@mattersmatter342 8 ай бұрын

@@ToweringToska You're right, farming bugs has to be easier. I'm just happy my ancestors didn't take the easy way out 😁. Those who want to eat bugs should, and those who prefer meat should continue to have that option. Mother Nature made it so each man is born individually, with some exceptions, so each individual should be able to decide what is best for them. God bless and take care.

@nathanmitchell7961 8 ай бұрын

17:10 Bugs have vastly less neurons than we have and may not suffer at all or may have a diferent kind of suffering" So the human brain provides an estimate of 85 billion neurons for a human brain, the largest of any animal, does this now mean humans have more potential for maximised suffering?

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

Humans can probably suffer in some ways most animals can’t, at least psychologically.

@MindVersusMisery 8 ай бұрын

@@domsnow6418 Psychologically maybe. But animals (human and non-human alike) feel via sensation. And some animals have evolved to have certain senses sharper than humans. So it may be the case that certain animals feel pain at a higher intensity than humans. And thinking about this make the horror of animal exploitation even tougher to face.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

@@MindVersusMisery true. Just think of a pig, with it’s impressive sense of smell, being forced into a slaughterhouse where it reeks of dead pigs. 😥🐷

@MindVersusMisery 8 ай бұрын

@@domsnow6418 Yeah, pigs are a great example because they seem to be very finely tuned sensation wise. My friend used to have a pig as a pet, and she was very emotional, loved belly rubs and to lay for hours in the warmth of the sun, and she was also very affectionate. I breaks my heart to know how badly mistreated animals are, given that they - if given the chance - can be loving family members.

@domsnow6418 8 ай бұрын

@@MindVersusMisery this drives me nuts when people say „bUt CaTs ArE pEtS tHo So YoU cAnT cOmPaRe“ - dude like anything can be a pet. Glad your friend was able to give at least one pig a decent life ❤️

@jasonbraun127 8 ай бұрын

Too many people see the discussion of animal rights as a simple question of “Is it okay to eat meat“ and they‘re completely missing the point. We should all be able to agree that torturing and killing animals in the billions just because we like the taste of it is morally indefensible. Once we get to the point where nearly all meat you could get came from an animal that had a healthy and normal life up to the moment of slaughter then we can start having a discussion about the morality of actually eating it but that point is so far away in the future that we might es well be discussing space travel.

@RomanticZero 8 ай бұрын

Surprised Peter didn't take you up on the point about the president; when we're discussing the value of two comparative lives (in this case, both human, sentient, etc.), we're talking about their moral value. Holding the office of US president doesn't make your life more morally valuable than any other. Functional value is something else entirely, but even if this was the yardstick, the office of president is elected and welcomes a wide range of people regardless of skill level -- this is not a function that only the person is capable of. To say we can't 'factually' (whatever that means) defend the notion that all human lives are equal by calling up an analogy from everyday life in which people are treated differently is not relevant to the question of moral value.

@SkyGlitchGalaxy 8 ай бұрын

Morals are a set of standards that enable people to live cooperatively in groups. So yes, of course you can morally value someones live more than another person. We do it everyday. I value my daughters live more than any other on earth. Then my wife. If you want to have a society of 300 Million people, it is absolutely moral for the state to value the life of the president more than any other person. He wouldn't be around lomg, if we didn't.

@RomanticZero 8 ай бұрын

@@SkyGlitchGalaxy You're interchanging at least two different definitions of 'moral' here, and neither in the same sense as Peter Singer, so your point is redundant. Always focus on the question and points at hand, not your own (in this instance, especially confused) interpretation of terms.

@SkyGlitchGalaxy 8 ай бұрын

@@RomanticZero No, I am sticking with the definition of Morals, and explaining the reason its good to have them. The point of having human morals, is to allow us to live and prosper together, not virtue signal on the internet.

@RomanticZero 8 ай бұрын

@@SkyGlitchGalaxy I can't overemphasise how badly you have misinterpreted the original point and the concept of moral value/worth here. An individual having moral value/worth is not to do with whether their actions correspond with normative morality.

@whatsdoin2392 6 ай бұрын

When you can not say that we should value human life over animal life then your moral compass is set to hell.

@ckq 8 ай бұрын

I don't think pain is a valid standard, pain is temporary. Life ends on the other hand.

@bjhcvuaerpigfy 8 ай бұрын

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying; are you saying that pain doesn't matter but that life ending does matter? Personally I feel it's the other way around. It matters how an animal dies: is there pain or not. That it dies is of no concern, everything dies eventually anyway.

@Cusnpbzn 8 ай бұрын

I always thought that to have rights you also had to have equal responsibilities. Since animals don't have the latter they can't have the former. Any attempt to give animals rights is like Israel assuming that Hamas will play by their same rules. Since Hamas does not play by the same rules of combat as Israel, any advantage the rules might give them need not be extended to them. The concept of rights was created inside the world view of Western Civilization. I support this world view but I am very skeptical that it can be applied to animals. If you assume it's a crime to kill an animal, you are also assuming that your point of view is universally applicable. You are forcing your view on animals. Is it true? No one knows. There's plenty of evidence that a plant based diet is better. There's little evidence that it's unethical to kill animals.

@IsitReallyrealreally 8 ай бұрын

#wearetheflaw

@ckq 8 ай бұрын

My thoughts Thoughts on animals rights: - the issue with "animal rights" is that they're inherently hypocritical. - a society thats "cares" about animal rights and also kills them for food or if they're inconvenient to us (deer for example) does not value animal welfare since murder is the worst crime a human do to another human, so if murdering animals is ok it means they don't have anywhere near the same rights as humans. - evolutionarily, this makes sense since animals are different species than us, so we should only have laws pertaining to the well being of humans. - additionally what is the logic between picking and choosing which animals are valuable to us? Dogs, Cats, American Eagles, Rats, Horses, Cows, Pigs, Ants, Bears, Deer, Fish, Moles, Rabbits, Ostriches, Beetles, even Plants? - for the above reasons, I don't believe there is any logic behind protecting animals for the sake of their inherent rights since we as a society don't value non-human life. - therefore, the only rational logic behind laws that ban animal cruelty is because we as a society believe the human behavior behind it is evil, not the results of the action. - I personally don't eat animals for health/cleanliness/personal morals (i.e. for selfish reasons, not selfless reasons). The argument that humans shouldn't eat animals because animals deserve rights never landed with me and the general public (why PETA always gets dunked on).

@ckq 8 ай бұрын

Wrote all this before listening btw

@evanwilliamson8338 8 ай бұрын

If you believe nonhuman animals are worthy of moral consideration, then it is rational to create and uphold laws that give them rights. I believe many nonhuman animals are worthy of moral consideration to varying degrees, and I believe this as a result of being exposed to evidence in the form of neuroscience, ethology, and evolutionary biology. Happy to recommend sources if you’re interested.

@DennisMoore664 8 ай бұрын

Picking nits here but I think it's odd that these get put up before I get the email notification about the full length episode. I expect it will show up in my in basket later today. As one-term former president Trump so eloquently said, It is what it is.

@jmal0982 8 ай бұрын

For the first time in my life , I felt a cow was looking right trough my soul.

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

Have you met cows up close? They're generally very smart, deep, patient and friendly. Dogs cats and cows are the animals I'm the least nervous about reaching out and touching when they're strangers, dogs and cats because they're easy to read, and cows because I trust them.

@Time_to_Stop_Animal_Abuse 8 ай бұрын

Thank u for discussing about this... I'm a coward so can't listen to this - 말 못하는 동물들이 너무 불쌍해. True human goodness, in all its purity and freedom, can come to the fore only when its recipient has no power. Mankind's true moral test, its fundamental test (which is deeply buried from view), consists of its attitude towards those who are at its mercy: animals. And in this respect mankind has suffered a fundamental debacle, a debacle so fundamental that all others stem from it. - Milan Kundera

@user-uz5dq2yh4h 8 ай бұрын

Most of this is a familiar conversation. Most interesting to me was Sam Harris postulating (34:33) that keeping animals for food in idyllic conditions would almost be a moral imperative vs. shunning animal agriculture totally. That seems to be logically sound and would mean that vegan/vegetarianism are not necessarily moral imperatives.

@erikdahlstrom3561 8 ай бұрын

its not morraly sound because keeping animals in idyllic conditions is incredibly impractical, everyone becoming vegan is way more practical

@keithcp85 8 ай бұрын

10% pre tax. Eek. Maybe if you’re making 250k+

@VitaSineLibertatenih 8 ай бұрын

To be fair, we either have specific rights for specific species or no animal rights at all (my position). The system we have now is a total schizophrenia when some animals in some circumstances almost human-like rights and some have no rights at all.

@rasputozen 8 ай бұрын

Surprising you come on the side of no animal rights, given you're not the one who suffers for it.

@VitaSineLibertatenih 8 ай бұрын

Humans are animals too btw, we are apes. Worms are animals too. Now, tell me a reason and a line you want to draw when some animal species in some circumstances should have some rights and others shouldn't. Then we add a second person who supports animal rights and watch you debate. Then a 3rd and so on. You will argue for millennia(because rights itself is a game, they don't exist). While I just make a cut on species basis : humans have rights, animals don't. Case closed.

@aaronpannell6401 8 ай бұрын

No rights at all? Could people could torture dogs if we wanted to?

@joshh5353 8 ай бұрын

What are talking about? In what world do animals have more rights than humans? What metric or mechanism are using to determine species-specific rights ?

@pichajooli1816 8 ай бұрын

#govegan

@dystopiaeatsmoney 8 ай бұрын

Sam Harris would rather spend a million hours discussing this topic than actually act in an ethical manner. He knows what he should be doing in order to align his ethics with his actions.

@vvggg12 8 ай бұрын

I think he may have some blind spots here but he has explained his rationale.

@landrytheraccoon 8 ай бұрын

Yeah but hamburgers are so good! Being sarcastic. I agree with you, it's embarrassing.

@bryanutility9609 8 ай бұрын

He has the ethics of a sick nerd. That’s why. Pathetic really, trying to “donate to global charity” 😂

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

I agree that is unfortunate and I hope Sam chooses to live a better example soon, I already appreciate that he's given this topic some more welcome light though.

@vvggg12 8 ай бұрын

@@ToweringToska Sam did explain that he feels worse as a vegetarian and the bloodwork bore that out. For whatever it’s worth. Not necessarily defending him, I’m a vegetarian

@endoalley680 8 ай бұрын

Does this line of reasoning lead us to say that advocating the removal of Arab Muslims from Gaza who lead quite miserable lives. And replacing them with Israeli Jews who will lead much happier and more fulfilling lives, is a morally positive position to take?

@carlosveraandrada4181 21 күн бұрын

It is good to avoid unnecesary animal pain, but let s not confuse some basic concepts: Singer said that a chimp rapes a female chimp. That term is absolutely absurd when speaking about non human animals.

@qdav5 8 ай бұрын

Not sure if I can handle this particular guilt trip right now. I think I will listen at some later time.

@Frodoswaggns 8 ай бұрын

The strength of a human is measured by how much truth they can take on.

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

@@meyer7262 You're the one off-topic here, would you mind keeping your violence to yourself?

@ToweringToska 8 ай бұрын

Remember to come back, this pursuit is worth it. ^u^

@jordanmasuccio 8 ай бұрын

Singers argument doesn’t take into account the psychological human suffering that would occurs if we killed an unintelligent human rather than killing a chimp. This emotional reaction people have is a type of pain, though we can agree suffering matters, so in a vacuum, singer is right, without a society like ours it doesn’t even work by utilitarian logic, because humans suffer in his worldview by proxy.