this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
100 points (90.3% liked)

Showerthoughts

30675 readers
443 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
    • If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
vatlark
forkball
Thekingoflorda
100
If you're thinking about something and reach a conclusion that's super outside the mainstream, you could be right, but also could mean you should reinspect your assumptions. (self.showerthoughts)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by LesserAbe to c/showerthoughts
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I saw a post on lemmy about how we could prevent 133 holocausts by promoting animal rights and veganism. The article opened by doing some math about how many dogs you could torture and kill in order to be equivalent to taking a human life, and then how many animals humans kill, and concluded that we're committing holocaust equivalents many times over.

I have respect for people who question the status quo and think seriously about morality. Thinking about slavery, it used to be argued "this is the natural order," "this is actually the moral thing to do" and so on. It wasn't easy then to stand up for what we now see as the obvious moral position. So I have some receptivity to this type of argument.

That said, I think back to when I was a Christian (atheist now), and was fully bought into the anti abortion movement. They argued that fetuses were human, that we were committing fetus holocausts all the time. Taking that view to its logical conclusion, one could justify things like killing a few (abortion doctors, judges) to save many (fetuses).

The author of the vegan piece was not advocating for such things. But one could ask why not. I think the fact the conclusion (133 holocausts) is so far outside accepted views should prompt some examination of the starting premises. (Is any killing of an animal for food the same as torturous factory farming, should we do something about animals that eat other animals etc)

I'm glad I read the piece because there's value in hearing other perspectives. We can't see ourselves and our own blind spots. I would have responded in-thread but that community description said "not a place for debate", so tossing out this thought here.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dohpaz42 3 points 7 months ago

If you’re willing, I feel there is a bias in your argument that I’d like to explore more with you.

You make the excellent point that plants are living organisms as well, but you also make the assumption that “it is much more humane to kill life forms without a brain.” You then go on to suggest that their sole purpose for existence is nothing more than reproduction.

I’d like to challenge both of those assertions. But before I continue, I want to make certain of my position as anecdotal, as I am not an expert in these matters.

It turns out that plants can see, smell, feel, and have a memory. And according to the scientist in the article, plants and humans also share DNA.

We’ve all heard the advice that we should talk to our plants, as they react more positively (grow) to the sound of our voices. We also know that plants play a vital role in our existence.

The most obvious is converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. They also provide shelter and protection for animals. They also help produce about 10% of the moisture in our atmosphere.

As for brains, no they do not have the same type of brain or nervous system that we as humans are accustomed to having. But that is not to say that plants are incapable of making decisions.

Take the Venus Flytrap as an example: it can detect when a bug has landed inside of its mouth, and after having another external stimuli triggered will it decide to trap that bug inside before it devours it for nutrients.

I could go on, such that plants do communicate with other (e.g., grass when cut, fungus creating underground networks to each other).