I was an inquisitive little kid, and also bothered by violence, be it in the insect or human world.
Anyways, my mother used to assure me that in the insect world, spiders are actually unusually merciful. They wind their hapless prey in a thin, strong web that both immobilizes and anesthetizes them.
Is that true? Are spiders really merciful? Is there hope yet for this world? Because actually, as I get older, I realize there is very little justice, in the human or animal world. But would I be wrong about this?
They’re merciful in the same sense that a kidnapper who ties you up and drugs you unconscious before killing you is merciful. I guess at least you’re not aware of what’s happening. Unless you wake up halfway through, paralyzed, feeling each limb slowly removed and eaten in front of you.
Mercy implies a level of decision-making that we don’t normally attribute to spiders – it requires the sacrifice of some self-centered desire for the good of another. I don’t think spiders have enough brain matter to make that kind of call.
That said, they’re not necessarily cruel either. They do what they’ve evolved to do – hunt, eat, mate. Sometimes eat their mates. But that helps them survive too.
That’s not how spiders eat.
They inject a venom (a mixture of enzymes) that liquifies the organs of their prey, and then they drink the resulting soup.
I’m not use that’s any better way to go, though.
I’ve never heard of the idea that the silk itself has any anaesthetic effect on the prey. AFAIK, it physically restrains the prey while the venom takes hold. This is advantageous to the spider if the prey is in any way capable of fighting back (e.g. A wasp or another spider)
99.999% of all organisms that can feel pain die feeling plenty of it. Most are dissolved alive in the digestive fluids, but a few lucky ones get torn apart fairly quickly by jaws, claws and talons. Some are killed by the Oklahoma Department of Corrections. Humans are the only species I know of that intentionally uses torture for fun.
Also the only species that is remotely concerned to minimise the suffering of what they are intending to eat. A tiger doesn’t care two hoots if you’re still conscious enough to feel it making a tasty appetiser out of your internal organs.
This isn’t exactly cruelty, though: Rather, it’s because domestic cats, like many domestic animals, are developmentally stunted. A wild cat will teach its kittens to hunt by releasing live prey near them. Capture it, then let it go to try again for more practice. An adult cat should have grown beyond needing this extra practice, but they’re stuck in kittenhood, and so keep on doing it.
It’s hard to define cruelty or mercy for a creature that lacks the awareness that other creatures have feelings, and precious few animals have that: Us, and maybe a handful of other social animals, and even those are debated.
I always thought that was because domestic cats have plenty to eat, but their capture instinct is still present. Why eat something if you are not hungry?
