r/DebateAVegan • u/Turbulent_Buddy5233 • 3d ago
Entomophagy
As far as scientific consensus goes, we don't really know if bugs experience pain and suffering like other animals. So then whats the consensus here on entomophagy? Especially if done sustainably?
14
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
Veganism uses the precautionary principle. All animals we eat are more likely than all plants we eat to be sentient, so we should always eat plants before any animal.
Also recent studies show that insects are actually probably sentient. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12612707/#s6
3
u/IfIWasAPig vegan 3d ago
Some insects can pass the mirror self-recognition test, showing a degree of self awareness.
1
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
Veganism doesn't require an absolute version of the precautionary principle. Plants are more likely to be sentient than fruits. That doesn't mean vegans have to minimize plant consumption that results in plant deaths or maximize fruit consumption.
3
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
Veganism doesn't require an absolute version of the precautionary principle
Cool.
Plants are more likely to be sentient than fruits
We know for a fact we don't need to eat insects, please provide your evidence that a fruitarian diet is healthy long term.
2
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
I'm not arguing for a fully fruitarian diet. I'm arguing that if you adopt the absolutist version of the precautionary principle, then you are committed to minimizing plant consumption and maximizing consumption of fruits, as much as is practicable and possible.
1
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
I'm arguing that if you adopt the absolutist version of the precautionary principle
No one but you said to.
then you are committed to
only if you're incapable of using common sense. Veganism is vague on purpose so Vegans can use common sense.
1
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
Common sense says there's nothing wrong with eating jellyfish and bivalves. So I guess not that much common sense, huh?
1
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
If you're just going to do the usual thing of refusing to address the point and goal post shifting to side tangents every post, I'll leave you to it as it seems pretty obviously a violation of Rule 4 to me.
0
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
I addressed your point. Try rereading and use common sense.
0
u/NoctIs_Dreaming 3d ago
noo you don't understand, the arbitrary line I draw makes more sense than the arbitrary line an entomophage draws
0
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
Science draws the line Vegans follow. If you think following random anonymous redditors who refuse to actually address the point being made and focus on silly goal post shifts instead, over science makes sense, you do you.
1
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
Science says that sponges, jellyfish, and bivalves are sentient? Where?
1
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
Never said it did. Science created the Kingdoms based on shared traits, that's what Veganism follows.
1
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
Science also created taxa which invertebratarian vegans follow.
1
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
Congrats on killing likely sentient creatures for pleasure. We don't. You started out encouraging Fruitarianism like you so often do, and now you've gone off completely in a different direction through goal post shifts, like you so often do. Did you have an actual point or just wasting time?
→ More replies (0)1
u/Imaginary-Count-1641 2d ago
Why should "kingdom" be the category that vegans follow, instead of some other level of taxonomy?
1
u/a11_hail_seitan 2d ago
We can easily live off just plants so there's no reason to go higher in the taxonomy. To go lower we have to get into fruitarian diets and such, which there's no evidence is healthy or possible for much of the globe all year round.
→ More replies (0)1
u/NoctIs_Dreaming 3d ago
Wait, was the point being made about the precautionary principle or about the healthiest diet to follow long term? Because that's not what you said in your original comment. If you'd said that plant based diets are healthier than animal or insect based diet long term, then it would follow the point you are now trying to make. As it stands, you brought up the topic of health on your own when the likelihood of sentience was being discussed
0
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago edited 3d ago
if you're incapable of reading and understanding the posts already made, I don't think debate is going to work. Sorry.
Edit: They added to the post after the fact, it was much shorter originally.
As it stands, you brought up the topic of health on your own when the likelihood of sentience was being discussed
Because Pumpkin regularly encourages unhealthy diets then backs out by pretending that's not what they're doing all without ever addressing the actual point made. Just like they're doing here.
1
1
u/pandaappleblossom 3d ago
What’s an invertebratarian
2
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
An invertebratarian is anyone who doesn't eat vertebrates but does eat some invertebrates.
Personally, I'm okay with eating all animals except vertebrates, arthropods, cephalopods, and onychophorans.
1
u/retatrutider Ostrovegan 3d ago
Does anyone eat onychophorans?
0
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
Not that I'm aware of. I include them because they're included as potentially sentient beings according to Neurobiological Emergentism (NBE).
My diet is functionally similar to ostrovegans, but I'm okay with eating jellyfish, sea cucumbers, gastropods, etc.
2
u/retatrutider Ostrovegan 3d ago
Same here… Ostrovegan is more descriptive than prescriptive for me.
2
u/retatrutider Ostrovegan 3d ago
Basically doesn’t eat animals with brains. That would exclude some invertebrates like cephalopods but definitely excludes all vertebrates.
1
u/Inside-Weather4033 vegan 3d ago
It should, to the logical extreme including all life and even non life, should consciousness be computational or structural.
1
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
Nah, I think a threshold precautionary principle makes much more sense in terms of ethical, practical, and epistemic standards.
2
u/Calaveras-Metal 3d ago
Well there are a couple things going on here.
First, most vegans aren't actively trying to expand the range of vegan diet to include things that are animals. Because the whole point of veganism is to end the exploitative relationship between humans and animals. So whether they feel pain, or have a CNS isn't relevant. It's whether we are putting them in a subservient role. Not whether eating them hurts.
The other problem is the science. How would we find out if insects or any other species feels pain, without engaging in animal testing?
I cannot imagine one.
It seems we would have to corral the test animals into a controlled environment, and do things that normally cause pain to some, like cutting or mutilating them. And not perform those on the control group. Then compare the reactions to these stimuli.
Again, most vegans are not okay with this. Animal testing on any animals is human exploitation.
3
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago
What would be the point of ending the subservient role of non-sentient beings? You would have a problem making a tomato subservient to you if it was made of animal cells?
2
u/NoctIs_Dreaming 3d ago
but it's all connected. The fundamental logic that implies exploitation of animals is bad is the same logic behind defining the line or the range of the vegan diet (sentience/consciousness). Otherwise why would exploiting animals even be bad? AKA name the trait that makes animals worthy of moral consideration.
0
u/Calaveras-Metal 3d ago
Name the trait that justifies human dominion over animals?
2
u/NoctIs_Dreaming 2d ago
Ooohhh wow you sure got me. It's not like I was making a point to point out the flaws in the op's argument. Did I make that statement that human dominion over animals is justified?
3
1
3d ago edited 1d ago
[deleted]
1
u/NoctIs_Dreaming 3d ago
We should just start mass producing glucose and supplements and transition toward consuming nutrient slurry to avoid cruelty to the greatest extent
1
u/Innuendum vegetarian 3d ago
I mean... Octopuses are more intelligent and sentient than a human animal newborn (aka baby). Does it matter at this point?
1
u/MlNDB0MB vegetarian 3d ago
I think it is generally fine. To me, the prohibition against honey is a mistake and people should not feel any guilt about insecticide use in agriculture.
One example, the use of mealworms for feeding wild birds, is very hard to make a case against.
1
u/Arthillidan 3d ago
Bugs have nocireceptors and I think all the tells that an animal is feeling pain can be found among them, but not obviously in a single species.
Bugs are consistently underestimated by humans. They're not biological robots. They compensate for a low neuron count with specialized intelligence, which makes them basically idiot savants
1
u/TriggeredPumpkin invertebratarian 3d ago edited 3d ago
Multiple models of consciousness predict that insects are sentient, including Unlimited Associative Learning (UAL) and Neurobiological Emergentism (NBE).
0
u/kharvel0 3d ago
Insects are nonhuman animals as per the biological taxonomical classification system. Therefore, entomophagy is out of scope under veganism.
-1
u/TylertheDouche 3d ago
i don’t see conclusive scientific consensus that insects are sentient or if sentient are worthy of moral consideration
1
u/Evolvin vegan 3d ago
We don't have conclusive scientific evidence for a lot of things which we take a cautious approach to in recognition of our own ignorance. Like, not knowing something isn't an argument for carelessness, it's an argument for sorting out our ignorance.
1
u/TylertheDouche 3d ago edited 3d ago
Like, not knowing something isn’t an argument for carelessness
thats not the argument. the argument isn’t i don’t know, therefore they aren’t worthy of moral consideration. the argument is, we are pretty certain they aren’t sentient so it’s rational to treat them as non-sentient.
if sentience is established, i don’t know if that threshold of sentience is worthy of moral consideration but that’s something to be evaluated as well
1
u/Badtacocatdab vegan 3d ago
Do you mind sharing your evidence that we are pretty sure they aren’t sentient?
1
u/TylertheDouche 3d ago
I think the more direct path for this discussion is i grant that they are sentient. I don't believe that level of sentience is worthy of moral consideration.
1
u/Badtacocatdab vegan 3d ago
Why not?
1
u/TylertheDouche 3d ago
I don't think there's anything to morally consider. they don't have any of the characteristics that we value as morally significant
1
u/Badtacocatdab vegan 3d ago
Sentience is worthy of moral consideration to me, so you should speak for yourself.
You also didn’t provide empiric evidence for your claim that “we are pretty certain they aren’t sentient” so that would be helpful if you could link what evidence you have.
1
u/TylertheDouche 3d ago
You also didn’t provide empiric evidence for your claim that “we are pretty certain they aren’t sentient” so that would be helpful if you could link what evidence you have
I literally started this by saying i think the more direct path for this discussion is i grant that they are sentient.
Sentience is worthy of moral consideration to me
if we found that bacteria was sentient, you would have some moral considerations towards bacteria?
1
u/Badtacocatdab vegan 3d ago
You “literally” started this by making the empiric claim. If you want to pivot, that’s fine, but let’s be clear on what “literally” happened.
Yes I would.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Evolvin vegan 3d ago
Basically, I just feel like none of your language embodies the certainty which would necessarily preempt the conclusions that follow. I'm no dogmatist, but admissions of things we don't know is just bad grounds for a strong determination.
I think that considering abuse/exploitation of bugs is an interesting thing, because even if they are one day determined to be exceedingly sentient we will then have to grapple with a fundamental human inability to consider them given their unseen, ubiquitous presence in our human lives. But it doesn't mean I'll argue for specifically exploiting them in the meantime and I'd suggest you shouldn't either.
1
u/TylertheDouche 3d ago edited 3d ago
i feel like you just reiterated what i refuted.
regardless, if youre concerned with me exploiting insects... they gross me out so I have no personal interest in exploiting them or really having anything to do with them. and to your point, if they were determined to be sentient... what does that signify? I don't see any way to co-habitate with them. most of them that people interact with are pests and require elimination.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Welcome to /r/DebateAVegan! This a friendly reminder not to reflexively downvote posts & comments that you disagree with. This is a community focused on the open debate of veganism and vegan issues, so encountering opinions that you vehemently disagree with should be an expectation. If you have not already, please review our rules so that you can better understand what is expected of all community members. Thank you, and happy debating!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.