“I see shining fish struggling within tight nets,while I hear orioles singing carefree tunes. Even trivial creatures know thedifference between freedom and bondage. Sympathy and compassion should be butnatural to the human heart.
I do feel that spiritual progress does demand, atsome stage, that we should cease to kill our fellow creatures for thesatisfaction of our bodily wants.
“Fish also have been victims of underhanded and shandy speciesism. We know, for example, that fish display long-term memory and clearly are sentient beings(Braithwaite, 2010, 2011). Consider what Verheijen and Flight(1997: p.362) write about fish:" There is a growing consensus that because of homology in behaviour and nervous structure all vertebrates, thus also fish, have subjective experience and so are liable to suffer." Consider also what Victoria Braithwaite writes about fish:" I have argued that there is as much evidence that fish feel pain and suffer as there is for birds and mammals - and more than there is for human neonates and preterm babies"(Braithwaite, 2010: p.153). She also notes(Braithwaite, 2011), "We now know that fish actually are cognitively, more competent than we thought before - some species of fish have very sophisticated forms of cognition... In our experiments we showed that if we hurt fish, they react, and then if we give them pain relief, they change their behaviour, strongly indicating that they feel pain." Fish have also been observed punishing after individuals who steal their food(Raihami et al., 2010).”
摘錄/引自：Marc Bekoff - Who lives, who dies, and why? How speciesism undermines compassionate conservation and social justice. 收錄於：The Politics of Species - Reshaping our Relationships with Other Animals. Edited by Raymond Corbey and Annette Lanjouw, 2013. Cambridge University Press.
“「動物」有知覺和情緒反應是普遍為人所知的，科學界也試圖透過嚴謹的科學考核，證明這一事實。2012年7月7日，一群神經研究學家雲集劍橋大學，於紀念DNA之父Francis Crick的會議上，發布《劍橋宣言：關於意識》（The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness），代表科學界表態指出，非人動物——從易觀察出的哺乳類和鳥類，到難以判斷的頭足綱軟體動物如章魚和烏賊，都有意識能力。 劍橋宣言的最後一段宣稱：「缺乏大腦新皮層似乎不表示生物沒有經歷情感狀態變化的能力。各類證據皆不約而同地指出：非人動物擁有構成意識所需的神經結構、神經化學及神經生理基礎，以及有能力展示帶有意圖的行為。因此，證據充分表明人類並非唯一擁有產生意識的神經基礎物質的生物。非人動物，包括所有哺乳類及鳥類、以及其他生物，包括章魚，也擁有這些神經基礎物質。」
(“The absence of a neocortex does notappear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergentevidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical,neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along withthe capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight ofevidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurologicalsubstrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including allmammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possessthese neurological substrates.”)(引自Heiman 2012)
Lucent is a feature-length documentary about the vast yet largely unseen suffering inherent to Australia's pig farming industry.
About the film
Commonly referred to as "the Australian Earthlings", Lucent is a feature-length documentary which explores the darker side of Australia's pig farming industry through a combination of hand-held and hidden camera footage, highlighting the day-to-day cruelty accepted by the industry as standard practice.
Lucent is the result of a successful crowdfunding campaign initiated in late 2013. Narrated by Lindsay McDougall (The Doctor from Triple J), the film contains footage from over 50 farms and slaughterhouses across Australia - much of this footage has never been seen before.
The documentary screened in Sydney, Canberra, Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide and Brisbane in October-November 2014, and will be released on DVD in early December."
"... In the U.S., many of the millions of cows and other animals who are killed for their skin endure the horrors of factory farming—extreme crowding and deprivation as well as castration, branding, tail-docking, and dehorning—all without any painkillers. At slaughterhouses, animals routinely have their throats cut and some are even skinned and dismembered while they are still conscious.
Buying leather directly contributes to factory farms and slaughterhouses because skin is the most economically important byproduct of the meat industry. Leather is also no friend of the environment, as it shares responsibility for all the environmental destruction caused by the meat industry as well as the pollution caused by the toxins used in tanning.
With every pair of leather shoes that you buy, you sentence an animal to a lifetime of suffering. Instead, you can choose from hundreds of styles of nonleather shoes, clothing, belts, bags, and wallets. Check out PETA’s cruelty-free clothing guide for great tips on where to find fashionable yet compassionate clothing. Fashion should be fun, not fatal!"
“I see shining fish struggling within tight nets,while I hear orioles singing carefree tunes. Even trivial creatures know thedifference between freedom and bondage. Sympathy and compassion should be but natural to the human heart.
I do feel that spiritual progress does demand, at some stage, that we should cease to kill our fellow creatures for the satisfaction of our bodily wants.
—Mahatma Gandhi (1867-1948)
我觉得人类心灵的提升是必要的，当到了某个层次，我们将不再为了满足食欲而杀害动物。
——甘地 （1867-1948）
The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for whites or women for men.
美國「農場庇護所」（Farm Sanctuary）共同創辦人Gene Baur指出，一般畜牧業者自以為在農場內養殖大量動物，每天餵飼牠們，就可以了解動物。但實情並非如此，當動物被關在狹窄的空間裡，牠們無法表現出自然天性，我們也因此而無法對動物有更多了解。在工廠化農場，這些動物無法做牠自己（These animals aren’t able to be who they are）。
What Is Animal Liberation? Excerpts From Philosopher Peter Singer’s Groundbreaking Work
"...Speciesism—the word is not an attractive one, but I can think of no better term—is a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species. It should be obvious that the fundamental objections to racism and sexism made by Thomas Jefferson and Sojourner Truth apply equally to speciesism. If possessing a higher degree of intelligence does not entitle one human to use another for his or her own ends, how can it entitle humans to exploit nonhumans for the same purpose?"
"Fish also have been victims of underhanded and shandyspeciesism. We know, for example, that fish display long-term memory andclearly are sentient beings(Braithwaite, 2010, 2011). Consider what Verheijenand Flight(1997: p.362) write about fish:" There is a growing consensusthat because of homology in behaviour and nervous structure all vertebrates,thus also fish, have subjective experience and so are liable to suffer."Consider also what Victoria Braithwaite writes about fish:" I have arguedthat there is as much evidence that fish feel pain and suffer as there is forbirds and mammals - and more than there is for human neonates and pretermbabies"(Braithwaite, 2010: p.153). She also notes(Braithwaite, 2011),"We now know that fish actually are cognitively, more competent than wethought before - some species of fish have very sophisticated forms ofcognition... In our experiments we showed that if we hurt fish, they react, andthen if we give them pain relief, they change their behaviour, stronglyindicating that they feel pain." Fish have also been observed punishingafter individuals who steal their food(Raihami et al., 2010)."
引自：MarcBekoff - Who lives, who dies, and why? How speciesism undermines compassionateconservation and social justice. 收錄於：The Politics of Species - Reshaping our Relationshipswith Other Animals. Edited by Raymond Corbey and Annette Lanjouw, 2013. CambridgeUniversity Press.
"「動物」有知覺和情緒反應是普遍為人所知的，科學界也試圖透過嚴謹的科學考核，證明這一事實。2012年7月7日，一群神經研究學家雲集劍橋大學，於紀念DNA之父Francis Crick的會議上，發布《劍橋宣言：關於意識》（The Cambridge Declaration onConsciousness），代表科學界表態指出，非人動物——從易觀察出的哺乳類和鳥類，到難以判斷的頭足綱軟體動物如章魚和烏賊，都有意識能力。 劍橋宣言的最後一段宣稱：「缺乏大腦新皮層似乎不表示生物沒有經歷情感狀態變化的能力。各類證據皆不約而同地指出：非人動物擁有構成意識所需的神經結構、神經化學及神經生理基礎，以及有能力展示帶有意圖的行為。因此，證據充分表明人類並非唯一擁有產生意識的神經基礎物質的生物。非人動物，包括所有哺乳類及鳥類、以及其他生物，包括章魚，也擁有這些神經基礎物質。」
(“The absence of a neocortex does notappear to preclude an organism fromexperiencing affective states. Convergentevidence indicates that non-humananimals have the neuroanatomical,neurochemical, and neurophysiologicalsubstrates of conscious states along withthe capacity to exhibit intentionalbehaviors. Consequently, the weight ofevidence indicates that humans are notunique in possessing the neurologicalsubstrates that generate consciousness.Non-human animals, including allmammals and birds, and many other creatures,including octopuses, also possessthese neurological substrates.)(引自Heiman2012) "
"...The whole point of Darwin's position was to indicatehomological resemblance between human and animal behaviour, and it followedthat is was no more absurd to speak of a higher mammal showing fear, reasoningpower, or pleasure than to call the structure on the end of a chimpanzee'sforelimb a hand. The difference was one of degree not of kind. Therewas one continuous 'thinking principle' throughout the animals which Darwinviewed as being contingent on the presence of an organized nervous system, andconsequently 'The difference between intellect of man and animals is not sogreat as between living thing without thought(plants) and living thing withthought(animals)'(T i.66)"
引自Jonathan Howard,<Darwin: A Very ShortIntroduction>(原版於1982年出版） 中譯本：《達爾文與進化論》，趙凌霞與何竹芳譯。北京：外語教學與研究出版社（2008年出版）。
*JonathanHoward為德國科隆大學遺傳學研究所細胞遺傳學教授，皇家學會研究員。
--
"Speciesism occurs when the interests of a being are accorded less or no weightsolely on the basis of species. To say that a being has interests is to saythat the being has some sort of mind—any sort of mind—that prefers, desires, orwants. It is to say that there is someone who prefers, desires, or wants. Youcannot act with speciesism with respect to a being that has no interests, suchas a plant.
Your entire argument rests on your confusing a reaction with a response. If youput an electrical current through a wire that is attached to a bell, the bellwill ring. The bell reacts; it does not respond. It is as absurd to say that abell has a “nonconscious response” as it is to say a plant does. "
引自Gary Francione/全文：
MICHAEL MARDER AND GARY FRANCIONE DEBATE PLANT ETHICS
"Whether it came from an animal on a fur farm or one who was trapped in the wild, every fur coat, trinket, and bit of trim caused an animal tremendous suffering—and took away a life.
Animals on fur farms spend their entire lives confined to cramped, filthy wire cages. Fur farmers use the cheapest and cruelest killing methods available, including suffocation, electrocution, gas, and poison.
More than half the fur in the U.S. comes from China, where millions of dogs and cats are bludgeoned, hanged, bled to death, and often skinned alive for their fur. Chinese fur is often deliberately mislabeled, so if you wear any fur, there’s no way of knowing for sure whose skin you’re in.
Animals who are trapped in the wild can suffer for days from blood loss, shock, dehydration, frostbite, gangrene, and attacks by predators. They may be caught in steel-jaw traps that slam down on their legs, often cutting to the bone; Conibear traps, which crush their necks with 90 pounds of pressure per square inch; or water-set traps, which leave beavers, muskrats, and other animals struggling for more than nine agonizing minutes before drowning.
During the annual Canadian seal slaughter, tens of thousands of baby harp seals are shot or repeatedly bludgeoned with clubs tipped with metal hooks. Also in Canada, hundreds of black bears are shot at point-blank range or caught in traps and left to suffer for days so that their skins can be used to make the ceremonial hats worn by Queen Elizabeth II’s Five Guards’ Regiments.
楼主
发表于 19-12-2014 03:31 AM
本周最热论坛帖子
2087 
60
