Here’s something that bothers me: the use of the word “octopi.”
The word is from Greek roots, not Latin. It should therefore form its plural in the Greek way: octopoda. Octopuses is also a fine choice. But there is no Earthly reason to add an ‘i’ to the end of a Greek or an English word to make a plural. That’s a Latin convention.
Octopi?
Octopoda?
Octopuses?
However one makes the word plural, the animal in question is delicious.
I’d say there is no difference between eating a pig and eating a dolphin. Animals may have varying degrees of cuteness or intelligence, but they are just animals, in the end.
Many Cites from many sites: Enjoy
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro98/202s98-paper3/Ball3.html Primates and cetacean have been considered by some to be extremely intelligent creatures, second only to humans
Intelligence argues them below Primate level. But research still continueing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_intelligence argues cognitive differences between dolphin species may be as marked as differences between humans and the great apes. Point to Blake.
http://typhoon.wcp.muohio.edu/boardman/GLG244/Presentations/09Dec/Dolphin/DolphinIntel.ppt Powerpoint Slide Show supporting their intelligence.
http://whales7.tripod.com/policies/levasseur/levass2f.html Argues we can’t establish their intelliegence until we get a breakthrough on communication or the Naval Papers start to get released.
http://www.earthtrust.org/delphis.html Where research is now. Supporting Dolphin intelligence.
Dolphins and Man.....Equals? some of the older research.
I hope this is a good sampling, pro and con. Notice the scientific studies are increasingly supportive of Dolphin intelligence.
Jim
Bricker: from http://www.answers.com/octopi&r=67
oc·to·pi (ŏk’tə-pī’)
n.
A plural of octopus.
I don’t care how you spell it. Just how I usually see it.
oc·to·pus (ŏk’tə-pəs)
n., pl. -pus·es or -pi (-pī’).
Any of numerous carnivorous marine mollusks of the genus Octopus or related genera, found worldwide. The octopus has a rounded soft body, eight tentacles with each bearing two rows of suckers, a large distinct head, and a strong beaklike mouth. Also called devilfish.
Something, such as a multinational corporation, that has many powerful, centrally controlled branches.
So both are correct. 
By the way, good catch, I took 4 years of Latin, so without thinking about it, I pluralized by making the us an i. I also use Pegasus -> Pegasi
I am ignorant of Greek. As you can see above, both Octopuses and Octopi are accepted in English.
Jim
I don’t really see a moral difference between the consumption of a dolphin and the consumption of a pig for nourishment. Granted, I recognize that I have some cultural bias when it comes to the animals I eat. I’ve eaten frog legs and I think they taste pretty good but I can never get over the fact that I’m eating frog’s legs. On the the other hand I can suck down multiple octupi or squid, suckers and all, to the horror and disgust of others sitting around my table. I’m pretty sure dolphins are bright animals but honestly that doesn’t really enter into my criteria for food. So watch out, neighbor.
Marc
A cursory review of those cites doesn’t (as far I can see) point to any conclusive or compelling evidence that they are markedly more intelligent than pigs (which was sorta-kinda Blake’s point IIRC) .
I don’t find it irrational to make a moral decision to eat food based on intelligence of the food creature, so long as it’s consistent.
Also, it makes some sense to decide by the size of the animal. If you only eat beef, you could eat for years and only effectively eat one cow, depending on consumption, whereas if you ate chickens, you’d be eating dozens of them.
So, ideally, if we could engineer gigantic animals that are barely aware that they exist, that would be ideal, right? Then everything up from there is a sliding scale, and at some point, people have to pick their personal line in the sand.
Bring back the Apatosaurus? 
What jrfranchi said, pretty much. I took am incredulous that anyone could think that any cetacean population is healthy enough for “sustainable harvesting”. The whale and dolphin population has been so drastically reduced by whaling and fishing bycatch that a lot of species are essentially fucked. They’re hovering close to the predicted margins where a species can’t recover, and a lot of genetic information has been lost forever with the mass slaughters of the 10th and 20th centuries. If you want baseline for sustainable cetacean numbers, wind the clock back to before industrial whaling and count the populations then.
The only pressure for whale and dolphin hunting comes from Japan, and has more to do with stupid pride than any continuation of tradition. Pre-WW2 Japan didn’t really catch any more whales than any other island nation, and they only started whaling in earnest after the WW2 defeat, and only then because they were desperate and had nothing else to eat. It’s only the fucktard attitude of some members of Japan’s ruling LD party that pressures for the resumption of open commercial whaling, and it has nothing to do with need or tradition, and everything to do with Japanese politics and society. Other rogue IWC members like Norway or Iceland only catch whales to sell to Tokyo - there’s no local market there any more.
You might as well argue for the sustainable harvesting of mountain gorillas.
I’ve seen footage of a commercial dolphin hunt, and it’s a pretty messy business. Even with modern Japanese fishing boats, it’s difficult to catch a dolphin without fucking it up, and that’s generally what they try to avoid as unblemished live dolphins are worth good money on the international dolphinarium market. The ones that get munched up by the nets etc. are sold as meat. I don’t know how they die, but I can be pretty certain it’s slow and agonising.
Fridgemagnet Thank you
I don’t doubt that Dolphins are intelligent, but the leap from Dolphin to human is huge, IMO. When a dolphins creates the ipod, the atom bomb, the Mona Lisa, heart bypass surgery, The Magic Flute, the four blade razor, the cell phone, Hamlet, Tivo, an alphabet, the printed word, or generations of acquired knowledge that extends beyond this is a good place to get food, this is a good place to have sex, and this is a good way to avoid my enemies, then I will think of them as more than potential food.
I can see arguing aginst eating them on grounds that they may be close to endangered or that hunting them is inhumane. But because they are smart…puh-lease.
How sure are you that the tuna you are eating isn’t part Dolphin?
Gee, good examples. Of course they didn’t invent war or politics or religion either. Might speak to their intelligence.
What is so awesome about a 4 blade razor, Cell Phone or Atom bomb?
Or were you trying to help me?
Jim
You could always have a little priest.
:rolleyes:
Of course you never made an assertion thatpeople eat domestic pigs. you made an assertion that all pigs eaten are domestic. The statement you actually made is quite clearly bollocks. Would you like to retract it now?
First off can the strawmen. I never said that the wild pig trade is massive compared to the domestic pig trade.
And you want a refernce that there is a wild pig trade in this world? I’ll happily provide any number if you want genuinely need them. However the fact that you require references that wild pigs areharvested for consumtpion onn large scale will say a lot about your particiapationin this debate.
OK, so you admit you are talking shite. That’s OK.
ANy internet trading site will verify those prices for boats and rifles.
Well, no. That’s theft. The cost is an arrest, a trial, a court case, a fine and a possible jail sentence.
The point being that you claimed that it is always cheaper to raise pigs than to harvest wild game. Quite clearly that is crap. Of course you have admitted you pulled it out of your arse so it’s hardly surprising that it’s crap.
Yes, they are. But how did that happen?
It happened by people ignorantly using “octopi” until it became acceptable. The first guy to use “octopi” was a erstaz-erudite putz. But a whole slew of putzes followed him, and now they have enshrined their puztiness (use of this Yiddish/english comment done intentionally for irony).
You you come along - not a putz - and have every right to use the word. True, you do – but only because you’re standing on the shoulders of puztes.
So to speak.
Can’t disagree with you. But it started a long time ago from what I can gather.
I have a set of the Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia from 1900. It list Octopi as the only plural, Octopodous was another identical word to Octopus.
As Latin was more commonly studied in the 1700’s & 1800’s, I will hazard to guess this is how it crept into use.
Octopodous is now obsolete from what I can find.
Jim
Well first off you can cut the strawmen. I never said that whale or dolphin populations were safe.
I did however call bullshit on your claim that all whale, dolphin and fish populations were falling at an alarming rate. That claim is obviously ignorant. I have called for a reference to support that claim.
So either cite or get off the pot.
If you really want a reference that many whale and dolphin populations are in fact increasing and not falling dramatically I will provide several. You need only ask.
I’m not surprised. You are clearly quite ignorant of this subject, yet feel passionately about it despite that ignorance. The fact that you believe that all whale, fish and dolphin populations are not just declining but declining drastically proves that ignorance.
It’s a normal reaction for people who feel passionately about t\subjects they are largely ignorant of to become angry when people start discussing the facts in a rational manner. There’s no room for emotional bluster, so you need to start analysing the facts. And the facts quite clearly show that all whale and dolphin populations are not declining. Yet you have devoted parts of your life to a cause based on an ignorant belief that they were. Presumably because someone told you they were and you never bothered checking.
How about a world renowned biologist and ecologist? Would that suit you?
“What people fail to realise is that the Cetacea (the group to which whales and dolphins belong) is an extraordinarily diverse group of mammals… It includes relatively large-brained hunters like dolphins and killer whales (which have the demonstrable intelligence of land-based hunters such as dogs) and tiny-brained filter feeders such as the blue whale. These leviathans are aquatic vacuum-cleaners, whose need for intellectual power is slight indeed.
If these animals are closer in intelligence to the sheep than the dog, is it morally wrong to eat them if they can be harvested sustainably? My view is that at present the anti-whaling lobby is frustrating the attempt to develop a sustainable industry based on these creatures, and is therefore frustrating good management of marine resources.”
I can provide any other number of references that you might like that show that many whales are about on par with cattle in terms of intelligence. I don’t know why anyone would believe that an animal that exists as essentially a grazer and that has no predators as an adult would require intelligence.
Looking through your ‘references’.
The first says that some researchers claim that cetaceans are second only to humans. But it doesn’t reference the claim so we have no idea who those researchers are or what they were basing that on. And the paper itself makes no conclusions at all regarding relative intelligence of cetaceans. So it’s a non-reference.
The second says that most researchers agree that dolphins are smarter than a dog. That is in perfect agreement with what I said: they are about as intelligent as a dog. But that doesn’t support your claim that *cetaceans[/.i] are the most intelligent creatures on this planet. Still waiting for a reference for that claim.
The third agrees entirely with what I said.
The fourth is a massive PPT file that I have no intention of downloading. When you say ‘their’ intelligence, doe sit really agree with you that cetaceans as a group are intelligent? Or does it actually say that some dolphins are intelligent?
The fifth ‘reference’ doesn’t say anything of relevance, as you yourself pointed out.
The sixth is a link to an ‘Earthtrust’, an obviously pro-environment, anti-whaling organisation. Hardly an acceptable reference in GD. Moreover the site itself doesn’t provide any evidence pertaining to relative cetacean intelligence.
Finally we have a link to “The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society”. That is simply not an acceptable reference in GD. Moreover the section you quote comes from the director of “The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society” speaking at a conference organised by “Compassion in World Farming” It’s hard to imagine a less biased source. And just to absolutely justify our decision not to credit this reference, he speaks of “a large amount of evidence pointing to the intelligence and sophisticated life of whales and dolphins” but never actually provides any of it. Sorry, but this simply is not an acceptable reference. It’s opinion from a biased source presented to a conference of a biased audience.
So tell us jrfranchi, can you actually provide any credible references at all that cetaceans as a group are more intelligent than pigs? Or do we file that as a statement of ignorance along with your claim that all fish, whale and dolphin populations are falling dramatically?
:rolleyes:
I don’t know about that. Your behaviour in this thread has shown you to be anything but rational on this subject. You are certainly not informed.
And I am still waiting for a reference to support your claim that dolphins have “great wisdom and discernment”. Or do we file that as a statement of ignorance along with your claim that all fish, whale and dolphin populations are falling dramatically, and your claim that cetaceans as a group are more intelligent than pigs.
No, it’s actually quite hopeless. Most of the impartial references actually say that we really can’t know. Some say that cetaceans vary greatly in intelligence. None say that cetaceans as a group are intelligent.
The very best reference you have says that some unnamed researchers say that cetaceans are second to humans in intelligence. That is your best reference. An unattributed third hand refer4nce to a nameless reseacher.
And of course several of the reference are so clearly biased they can de discounted entirely. FFS, what made you think that opinion on the “The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society: website would be acceptable in GD?
Increasingly supportive? Nobody has ever denied that dolphins are intelligent. All mammals are intelligent. What you claimed was that cetaceans as a group are second only to humans in intelligence. That’s just bollocks. A great many cetaceans are about on par with cattle in terms of intelligence.
And what information is that incredulity based on?
Please explain the science behind that ‘reasoning’? If we want baseline sustainable US deer numbers do we also have to wind the clock back before humans appeared on the continent? What possible logic is there in this ‘reasoning’? It flies in the face of all wildlife management and ecological principles. It’s simply the Natural Law Fallacy.
Absolute garbage. At least 12 nations hunt whales and dolphins, including good white man’s countries like Australia, Canada and (gasp) the US.
Well, no, not at all. In fact there is simply no comparison to be made. Mountain gorillas number in their hundreds at best, and their range is numbered in the hundreds of square kilometres at best. Various dolphin species number in the millions and their range is hundreds of thousands if not millions of square kilometres.
Yes, slaughtering animals does tend to be messy. Do you think that a pig abattoir isn’t a messy business?
Of course you can. And now you are going to tell us how you can be so sure.