• 67

來自地獄的聲音

四葉幸運草 wrote:
強調動物有感覺可以拿...(恕刪)


謝謝您的分享。

我不確定植物是否有任何跟動物一樣的情緒感受能力。

關於動物與植物,以下學者之說與學界宣言,可供您和大眾參考。

"...The whole point of Darwin's position was to indicate homological resemblance between human and animal behaviour, and it followed that is was no more absurd to speak of a higher mammal showing fear, reasoning power, or pleasure than to call the structure on the end of a chimpanzee's forelimb a hand. The difference was one of degree not of kind. There was one continuous 'thinking principle' throughout the animals which Darwin viewed as being contingent on the presence of an organized nervous system, and consequently 'The difference between intellect of man and animals is not so great as between living thing without thought(plants) and living thing with thought(animals)'(T i.66)"

引自Jonathan Howard,<Darwin: A Very Short Introduction>(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)。

*Jonathan Howard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 weight solely on the basis of species. To say that a being has interests is to say that the being has some sort of mind—any sort of mind—that prefers, desires, or wants. It is to say that there is someone who prefers, desires, or wants. You cannot act with speciesism with respect to a being that has no interests, such as a plant.

Your entire argument rests on your confusing a reaction with a response. If you put an electrical current through a wire that is attached to a bell, the bell will ring. The bell reacts; it does not respond. It is as absurd to say that a bell 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

Gary L. Francione is Board of Governors Professor, Distinguished Professor of Law and Nicholas deB. Katzenbach Scholar of Law and Philosophy at Rutgers University.
來源:Gary L. Francione Facebook

-----

科學界終於正式宣稱動物也有意識

「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物質,以及有能力展示帶有意圖的行為。因此,證據充份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 not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Nonhuman animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.”) (The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, 2012, P.2)」

摘錄自:http://pansci.tw/archives/23959

cherish_ying wrote:
謝謝您的分享。我不確...(恕刪)

你認定沒感覺
所以你可以把惡念傳給植物
加害植物上然後給食用食物的人
你自己不相信別人的研究文獻
那就不要貼他人的文章給我看
這是一種互相的給予尊重
還有別再講你不確定所以你可以怎樣了
植物有感受能力你可以自己實驗證實
記得你把你的惡念傳送給植物
自己留下來吃別害人
還有你到處傳送惡念
惡意的後果請不要讓其他生物承受


四葉幸運草 wrote:
你認定沒感覺
所以你可以把惡念傳給植物
加害植物上然後給食用食物的人
你自己不相信別人的研究文獻
那就不要貼他人的文章給我看
這是一種互相的給予尊重
還有別再講你不確定所以你可以怎樣了
植物有感受能力你可以自己實驗證實
記得你把你的惡念傳送給植物
自己留下來吃別害人
還有你到處傳送惡念
惡意的後果請不要讓其他生物承受


四葉 我覺得您跟他說在多的也沒有用
因為我不認為他真的有在思考他所PO的文章
跟和他理性和平談論觀點的人的回文
只會一昧的說吃素好...

話說最新有一個新聞是
吃素比吃肉更容易致癌
怎麼開版的你不解釋一下?
風無 wrote:


四葉 我覺得您跟他說在多的也沒有用


風大&葉大兩位大大辛苦了,我吃肉

套句佛家說的,眾生皆平等,版大提倡吃素認同你,但萬物皆有生命,吃菜是否有考慮過它們感受?也許會說我在屁話,但是它們不表達不代表沒生命,我雜食動物,至少吃東西不浪費,

真惡不可怕,偽善才是最可恥的(最近有體會南部某宗教團體,怒)

danjuan78 wrote:
風大&葉大兩位大大辛...(恕刪)


關於動物與植物,以下學者之說與學界宣言,可供您和大家做參考。

"...The whole point of Darwin's position was to indicate homological resemblance between human and animal behaviour, and it followed that is was no more absurd to speak of a higher mammal showing fear, reasoning power, or pleasure than to call the structure on the end of a chimpanzee's forelimb a hand. The difference was one of degree not of kind. There was one continuous 'thinking principle' throughout the animals which Darwin viewed as being contingent on the presence of an organized nervous system, and consequently 'The difference between intellect of man and animals is not so great as between living thing without thought(plants) and living thing with thought(animals)'(T i.66)"

引自Jonathan Howard,<Darwin: A Very Short Introduction>(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)。

*Jonathan Howard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 weight solely on the basis of species. To say that a being has interests is to say that the being has some sort of mind—any sort of mind—that prefers, desires, or wants. It is to say that there is someone who prefers, desires, or wants. You cannot act with speciesism with respect to a being that has no interests, such as a plant.

Your entire argument rests on your confusing a reaction with a response. If you put an electrical current through a wire that is attached to a bell, the bell will ring. The bell reacts; it does not respond. It is as absurd to say that a bell 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

Gary L. Francione is Board of Governors Professor, Distinguished Professor of Law and Nicholas deB. Katzenbach Scholar of Law and Philosophy at Rutgers University.
來源:Gary L. Francione Facebook

-----

科學界終於正式宣稱動物也有意識

「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物質,以及有能力展示帶有意圖的行為。因此,證據充份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 not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Nonhuman animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.”) (The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, 2012, P.2)」

摘錄自:http://pansci.tw/archives/23959

cherish_ying wrote:
關於動物與植物,以下...(恕刪)

又跳針
你無視別人的痛苦不願溝通
只願自己惡意傳導他人
因此請你自己接收自己的惡念吧

cherish_ying wrote:
我不確定植物是否有任何跟動物一樣的情緒感受能力。

不知道就不要亂講話。

照你的固執守舊,你應該相信地球是平的,還是宇宙的中心吧!
這跟看完諾亞方舟會有許多問號一樣
反正我不浪費食物,吃肉也吃菜,至於研究有他意義存在,只是看個人怎麼選擇而已,沒看到鬼不表示它不存在,植物不會叫不表示它不會痛,啊米陀佛,阿門
分享我跟一位朋友說的話:

昨天我以走路會踩到螞蟻為例,說明有時我們難以避免殺生。但我忘了補充,這並不是說我們就可把傷到螞蟻視為理所當然的事。只是真要完全不傷到,不簡單。我們只能嘗試努力去做。

嘗試不傷卻不容易做到這件事讓我領悟,我們的生命其實有很多限制。活下去就要做飲食,但無論食肉或蔬果,都會傷到其他生命。我們只能遵循自己的心,選擇自己覺得可以做到的方式。對我而言,不吃食跟我們一樣有明顯感受能力的雞、豬、牛、羊、魚等動物,就是一種較少對動物造成傷害的選擇。或許這不完全對,但至少我覺得這是一種對動物比較好,自己也可以做到的方式。我們都不是完全自由的生命,沒有誰的選擇比誰好或高尚。

這一生陪伴自己最長時間的人,還是自己。而這段漫長旅程讓自己好過的方式之一,就是聆聽心的聲音。

以上是我的一些想法分享,共勉之。

19/5/2014


cherish_ying wrote:
謝謝您的分享。
我不...(恕刪)



還來啊

你不確定只表示你的道行淺了點

眾生本是平等

動植物無所謂貴賤之分

取所當取 不浪費食材

才是順天之道


對動植物不要只有分別心

都是一樣是生物

起了分別心,那只表示你還沒看透

這時,千萬不要出來害人
  • 67
內文搜尋
X
評分
評分
複製連結
請輸入您要前往的頁數(1 ~ 67)
Mobile01提醒您
您目前瀏覽的是行動版網頁
是否切換到電腦版網頁呢?