The shrimp welfare project

(benthams.substack.com)

81 points 0xDEAFBEAD | 1 comments | 18 Nov 24 14:44 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

Show context

thinkingtoilet ◴[18 Nov 24 15:10 UTC] No.42172998[source]▶

I love articles like this that challenge the status quo of morality. I find my self asking the question, "Would I rather save a billion shrimp or one human?" and I honestly think I'm siding on the human. I'm not saying that answer is "correct". It's always good to think about these things and the point the author makes about shrimp being a test of our morality because they're so different is a good one.

replies(6): >>42173031 #>>42173080 #>>42173385 #>>42175436 #>>42175641 #>>42180356 #

himinlomax ◴[18 Nov 24 15:17 UTC] No.42173080[source]▶

>>42172998 #

The best way to save even more shrimps would be to campaign for and subsidize whaling. They are shrimp-mass-murdering machines. What's a few whales versus billions of shrimps?

replies(3): >>42173120 #>>42175538 #>>42175779 #

1. DangitBobby ◴[18 Nov 24 19:09 UTC] No.42175779[source]▶

>>42173080 #

You see this type of argument used against animal welfare all the time. At the end of the day, I dismiss them all as "we can't be perfect so we might as well do nothing".

As the article suggests, imagine you must live the lifetime of 1 million factory farmed shrimps. Would you then rather people quibble over whether we should hunt whales to extinction and ultimately do nothing (including never actually hunting whales to extinction to save you because they don't actually care about you), or would you rather they attempt to reduce your suffering in those millions of deaths as much as possible?

↑