I think that it was good to include this interview because it broadens the debate somewhat.
It has always seemed strange to me that 'science' would seriously question if animals were conscious. After all, we are evolved from animals, and since we know consciousness exists in at least one species, there seems no explanatory value in denying it to others (without some compelling evidence). In other words, Occam's razor, if applied sensible, would seem to come down on the side of animal consciousness.
I too tend to eat vegetarian and fish - although I do make exceptions if I am a guest. The intense cruelty of modern farming methods, the usual health issues, and the more obscure issues such as the BSE outbreak in Britain (now sadly, probably being replicated in the US) have all driven me that way.
People always say that science is value free - figuring out the properties of uranium isotopes is the same whether you are going to use the information to build a power station or a bomb. I suspect the value free nature of science - when applied to biology - is another example of a certain hollowness (to use Alex's description) that can only be filled by a radical change of viewpoint.
David  |