jobyts
- 226
- 60
Makes me really sick.
Last edited by a moderator:
How is the way we treat lobsters somehow more humane? We boil live lobsters, crabs, and crawfish. They are best when they are alive up to the moment they are dropped into that pot of boiling water.Greg Bernhardt said:I've seen it with lobster and it's disturbing. I don't get it.
D H said:How is the way we treat lobsters somehow more humane? We boil live lobsters, crabs, and crawfish. They are best when they are alive up to the moment they are dropped into that pot of boiling water.
D H said:How is the way we treat lobsters somehow more humane? We boil live lobsters, crabs, and crawfish. They are best when they are alive up to the moment they are dropped into that pot of boiling water.
Even closer to home, we eat live shellfish. Oysters on the half shell -- yumm. Marinated scallops -- double yumm. Those oysters are alive (or should be alive) right up to the moment they are chomped. Those scallops are (or should be) alive right up to the moment they are sliced and dropped in the marinade.
the thread title said:Can you eat Ikizukuri cuisine?
Hopefully they don't feel pain, but the frog definitely can.turbo said:I can't plead innocence, since I love shucking oysters and eating them, but at least they are not looking at me like the frog...
Yes, that's true. I watched a documentary where people in India would go to a convention to swallow a fish alive, because they thought it would heal their asthma.Evo said:This whole thing about eating food while it's alive is based on superstition, that somehow the "life force" from the living animal is transferred to the eater. It needs to be stopped.
In our culture, yes. In their culture, no. To the Japanese (and many other Asian cultures), it's a sign of ultimate freshness. Just because we see it as gross doesn't mean they do.inotyce said:They should get its head off the dish, customer won't eat the head with skin on alive anyway. It is there to disgust me, seemingly so.
jobyts said:We, humans, are as empathetic as how much our mirror neurons tell us.
http://www.parentingscience.com/empathy-and-the-brain.html
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/do_mirror_neurons_give_empathy
A human resembling live eye on a plate gives us bigger secondary pain.
A half dead moving animal on a plate gives us secondary pain than a dead animal.
Killing an animal which has more features as our own species give us more secondary pain. (more empathetic on a mammal dying than a non-vertebrate(scallop, oysters))
It hurts you more when a cuter and bigger animal suffering (bird, dog, cat, rabbit) than a not-so-cute smaller animal (fly, mosquitto).
People who are against killing an animal for food has less issue with killing a mosquito.
It hurts immensely to watch a human die that to see a picture of a human dying. It hurts more to see a human dying than to read a news about some death.
So, to answer to why we are less empathetic to some creatures, it is just the way we are evolved.
We just seem to be more connected to some of the species.
If we kill another animal for our own evolutionary benefit, the action seems justified for the masses.
A half dead live looking animal on a plate might give a freshest food feeling for some minds, but there is no evolutionary advantage to it. Plus, we get confused what happened to their secondary pain.
surprise said:If frogs looked like giant featureless blobs of jelly, we wouldn't have this problem. Whether it were alive or not, and whether it felt pain or not, would become irrelevant to this unique cuisine experience.
D H said:In our culture, yes. In their culture, no. To the Japanese (and many other Asian cultures), it's a sign of ultimate freshness. Just because we see it as gross doesn't mean they do.
Of course they are able to detect noxious stimuli, they have nociception. Flies can be trained to avoid being shocked. The idea that an animal would evolve without pain perception is a strange concept, an animal like that wouldn't stay around long enough to give offspring. The only thing we can't measure is the experience, but we can't even do that in humans.phosgene said:In the first place, I don't think flies or mosquitoes feel pain.
Of course not. Fresh beef doesn't taste very good. Why do you think Texans invented chili con carne? Answer: To hide the not-very-good taste of fresh-killed beef (and also to hide the not-very-good taste of beef that really should have been eaten a couple of days before). Beef needs to be aged a bit to taste good.Greg Bernhardt said:Do the Japanese eat their kobe beef with the head still mooing?
Exactly.Monique said:Of course they are able to detect noxious stimuli, they have nociception. Flies can be trained to avoid being shocked. The idea that an animal would evolve without pain perception is a strange concept, an animal like that wouldn't stay around long enough to give offspring. The only thing we can't measure is the experience, but we can't even do that in humans.
D H said:That's a difference of degree, not kind.
Well, eating oysters on the half shell doesn't license one to start butchering other animals without considerations, right? In that sense eating the oyster is hypocritical, not the other way around. Do consider that the oysters are always served on ice, so the animal is numbed by the time it's eaten.D H said:I love oysters on the half shell. I know that my disgust at that poor frog is cultural and hypocritical.
phosgene said:But there's absolutely no need to cut something up while it's conscious, rip its organs out and then leave it to die in excruciating pain.
jobyts said:But that the way most of the preys die, eaten by the non-human predators.
jobyts said:The ones predated by humans are the few lucky ones.
jobyts said:This frog just had a very normal painful death compared to most of her buddies.