Nitpick about the nitpick, don’t know about elsewhere, but they still use it in Britain on a tediously regular basis.
You’ve established that you judge your comfort more important than the life of one animal. If anyone anti-animal-testing also holds this view, I’d like to hear why. Or how, more precisely.
Some of them say, “This finished product never tested on animals.”
Robertliquori, are you sure mosquitoes feel pain? I don’t think so.
The oddest thing about the OP is that a large portion of it seems to be copied verbatim from this site, yet on that very site, there is a link to companies that do not test on animals, and lo and behold, L’Oreal is on that list.
As they are notorious for copy and paste hatchet-jobs, did you find this on some blog somewhere? If so, you might want to let the blogmeister know that his/her outrage should be focused somewhere else, and that an extra two minutes of research would have made their plagiarism at least accurate.
Isabelle, Do you have a reputable cite that says rabbits are tested in the way you claim in your OP?
I believe (and I’ll check it out) that Loreal may have FINALLY given up testing on animals. It’s my understanding that they were rather notorious for their cruelty in the labs (no, I don’t have a freaking cite. Check out PETA’s website, maybe.)
I’m astounded that anyone would advocate testing on animals for something as trivial as cosmetics; we’re not talking about the cure for cancer here.
Define “feel.” Even plants have communicable chemical “panic” responses to attack.
So do bacteria. I’ll define “feeling pain” as suffering or as an unpleasant sensation.
originally by robertliguori:
Pretty simplistic way to interpret what I had said before over several posts. I’d like to think that I answered that fairly precisely. Here is another attempt, then I’ll stop.
There are completely needless wastes of life, and undue amounts of suffering are heaped on other forms of life, like the continued testing of cosmetics. OTOH, there are other reasons to kill that are more defensible. This could be your body defending itself reflexively against an infection (I am trying to wipe a virus out of myself as I type, how selfish of me) , or testing to see if this drug is likely to kill the infection without killing me, on another animal. One is pretty much without merit at all, and the other at least has my survival in mind. If you want to live in a fantasyland where you think you kill nothing to survive, go ahead. Even the Hare Krishnas are decimating the next generation of plants by eating their seeds. I decided that believing that way was just not facing the reality of the situation.
In short, I agree that any cosmetic company continuing animal testing is just not worth it, but I remind you that some things are.
Can I be sure that anyone but myself is conscious? Note, it is possible for an organism to be “self-aware” without being conscious–much like Task Manager is “aware” of all the processes on my computer, including itself, but presumably is not conscious. Or is it? :eek:
OK electric!sheep, we’re getting a bit off topic here. Your computer may be “self-aware”, but it wouldn’t be cruel to smash it with a hammer. Depending on which definition of “pain” you use, it can be said that a plant “feels pain”. But of course with out any kind of brain at all, the plant doesn’t suffer or feel anguish. My point was that robertligouri’s allusion that swatting a mosquito can be siad to be comparable to throwing chemicals in a rabbit’s eyes, is a bit ridiculous.
Define suffering, x-ray. My computer has a brain (albeit silicon), is self-aware, and is currently running Windows XP. If that’s not suffering, I don’t know what is.
Ah hah! you say, your computer is just a set of preprogrammed responses. That’s not real suffering.
And someone, the One True Scotsman laughs.
(For the metaphor-impaired, I am claiming that stating that computers, plants, and mosquitos not suffering without without defining suffering is an example of the No True Scotsman fallacy.)
Cite?
Er, is that cite request directed at me? My computer is indeed aware of itself. This can be trivially demonstrated with plug-n-play hardware, the task manager, a dir command in the windows directory, etc.
My computer does indeed have a CPU. Otherwise, posting this would be a mite tricky. You’ll have to take it on faith that I’m running XP. If you are asking for proof that running XP is suffering, you apparently aren’t.
How about th definition of “anguish” robert?
anguish- Agonizing physical or mental pain; torment.
Where are you going with this? I’m assuming you’re sane enough to feel more guilt smashing a man’s brain in then smashing apart a computer. You’re getting way off topic from the OP.
shakes head My computer often “agonizes” when I try to shut it down, but that hardly means it is conscious. Again, the only thing which inclines us to avoid causing harm is empathy, which is (in part) the belief that the other entity feels the same way as you do. Unfortunately, this is but a belief unless you prove that the entity is conscious, and thus can distinguish between vigorous panic responses and vigorous panic responses that are experienced subjectively.
I don’t think your computer “agonizes” electric!sheep.
The problem with computer models is the GIGO effect: Garbage In, Garbage Out. A computer model is only as good as the data that’s programmed into it, which is always going to be incomplete.
Computer models can be effective as teaching aides, such as showing students the internal organs of a frog rather than having them do dissection (still, would you send your pet to a vet who’d only studied computer models?), but they’re only really useful for research when doing actual experiments is too impractical (geology, astrophysics, meteorology, etc.).