home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsflash.concordia.ca!mizar.cc.umanitoba.ca!chrstie
- From: chrstie@ccu.umanitoba.ca (William John M. Christie)
- Subject: Re: Hunting is Ethical
- Message-ID: <C1CDA0.En9@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
- Sender: news@ccu.umanitoba.ca
- Nntp-Posting-Host: lequin.cc.umanitoba.ca
- Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
- References: <1993Jan21.221243.18639@cbfsb.cb.att.com> <C18wAF.1x7@wpg.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:46:47 GMT
- Lines: 31
-
- In <C18wAF.1x7@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
-
- [stuff deleted]
-
- >The lions mentioned in Will's previous post, for example, are
- >undeniably "sentient", but they may lack the "sapience" and
- >knowledge to fully understand the consequences of their actions
- >and to alter them in some way. Mature, mentally healthy human
- >beings, by contrast, are capable of understanding the impact that
- >their actions have on other individuals, in spite of their
- >ability to "get away" with a particular action.
-
- My problem came from the fact that I didn't consider the lion sapient and
- by transitive property neither the deer. Ergo we could hunt them with
- impunity.
-
- It appears that your definition of sentience differs from mine. This
- however raises a question: do you agree that sentient beings should
- avoid killing each other? If so then do you consider what the lion does
- to the deer as wrong? Or is sapience also necessary to make the
- distinction (personally I lump sapience as an integral part of sentient),
- sort of not guilty by ignorance?
-
- Will Christie
- chrstie@ccu.UManitoba.CA
-
- --
- ==========================================================================
- Any opinions expressed above are usually made with some thought which
- is my own and is not intended to represent the University in any way.
- ==========================================================================
-