Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My entire reaction to this thread is LOLWUT?

Every time I meet someone like this I can't help but think that they are Luddites - it seems to me that the current progress of the human race was built on the backs of slavery of humans and animals.

Neither a human nor an animal is significantly different than any other collection of star-forged atoms (such as an iron deposit). I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.

I'll take that challenge...

If you actually believe and live by your last statement, you'd be a psychopath by society's standards and kill humans or animals without remorse or empathy as they are 'just a collection of atoms'. Self aware beings that we are, we measure ourselves by rules we implement via our collectives in order to maintain structure. I don't run over a pedestrian in the way of my intended car parking spot or shoot someone in the head when wanting to get ahead in the queue to pay for my groceries because I have a measure of empathy for the other people around me, this extends, to a lesser degree, to animal life around me and when I've hunted or fished, I have tried to ensure I minimize the suffering of the animal I intend to eat because I understand pain and do not wish to extend that unpleasant experience to another being.
We seek to reduce the suffering of other living things due to the level of empathy we possess as a cognitive being capable of recognizing similarities with other life forms.

 Eggs wrote:
I'm genuinely curious as to how you balance being repulsed by the thought of using an animal hair brush, but are perfectly fine with synthetic brushes made from oil, often times harvested from the sea bed, which can result in causing major suffering and death in marine animals such as whales and porpoises etc? You only have to look at the Deepwater Horizon tragedy to see the environmental cost of raping the oil reserves, and the millions of lives lost, from singled celled organisms, all the way up to complex life.

Me, I don't get it. I'd never want an animal to suffer, but I'm quite happy to gut a fish for the barbecue, buy a leather couch, or use a good quality sable paint brush. I reckon I have a decent understanding of where the things I buy come from, and appreciate the fact I can buy them.

It's a bit like the whole electric car nonsense, as in, an electric car, over the life cycle of the product, is more harmful to the environment than my V8 jag - lots of nasty chemicals and manufacturing processes involved in the manufacture of the electric car, and of course, the hidden environmental cost of the electricity (whether its from coal fired plants, nuclear plants or whatever). At a superficial level, its all well and good you avoiding the obvious environmental cost of a sable brush, but when you're using your non-biodegradeable synthetic number, just remember that somewhere, a fish probably died to make that brush.

This balance is incredibly hard to find.

It is almost impossible to live daily life 100% ethically safe and also in a normal fashion. Being aware of every single item you use & encounter day in day out.... subsequently avoiding (indirect) use of certain ingredients in certain products.... keeping it entirely oil-product free for example.... I can't imagine this reasonably possible. It probably is, but unless you get to the most basic hippy levels it is as good as undoable.

If you take it to the extreme you would never be able to safely eat anything anywhere that you didn't yourself grow or buy at the "safe" store. Are these fries made in vegetable oil or animal fat? Do I order fries at McDonalds? Could you use the phone at work, or is there an oil product used in it or somewhere in the production process? Toothpaste and shaving cream, soap... is it, or is there any ingredient that was animal tested? I did some research on that, and I can tell you it is incredibly hard to know. This brand/company that claims to be animal test free is owned by another parent company which also owns a third company that does involve animal testing. In the end your money goes into the pockets of the parent company. This product isn't tested on animals, but some of the ingredients might have been somewhere in the developmental process. Sometimes local restrictions are avoided by having things done elsewhere, down again to the level of individual ingredients so you never can be sure. It goes on and on and is extremely complicated.

So it basically comes down to drawing the line somewhere.

I have resigned to the fact that I can't be aware of everything, but I try to do the best I can. This thread for example has shown that the gaining of the brush hair isn't as clear cut as it seems, and some ways do definitely cross my line, but others don't necessarily have to. The problem remains that we often can't know without a shadow of a doubt.

 Lead Farmer wrote:
As a person who keeps hens for eggs as a way to reduce animal cruelty in a very real way, I hate these kinds of animals as they will frequently break into the chicken coop and slaughter all the birds for no other reason but the pure joy of it. The don't eat anything. Killing these things reduces animal cruelty. This whole group of animals is sadistic.

Horse gak.

Weasels, foxes, chimpanzees, marmots, prawns, beluga whales, sea anemones, dogs, humming birds and, oh yeah, every other species on the face of the earth are incapable of sadism. It's entirely a human quality.

If your chicken coop isn't critter proof, you need to improve it. We, as a species, can journey to the moon, split the atom and clone life and you're telling me you get outsmarted by a weasel?

Chicken wire and a concrete floor... My auntie keeps chickens, rescued battery hens, had them for years. They free run in the days and live in the coop at night. She's never lost one to a fox or stoat or weasel. She built her coops to be impregnable.

 Happygrunt wrote:

 TBD wrote:

 Testify wrote:
...this is a terrible thread. Dude says he doesn't like animal cruelty going into making paintbrushes and is essentially trolled and flamed by people mocking the very notion of feeling sympathy for animals.

the internet.

It isn't the thread, it is the responses made in it.

I am aware the world is inhabited by uncaring simpletons mostly.

If the result of this thread is that 1 person is enlightened against 100 of these Homo Heidelbergensis types, then I consider it a succes already.

Way to collect people to your cause, by insulting the very people you are trying to convince.

Personally, I am against animal cruelty. But I also won't let it get in the way of practicality.

Did I say who specifically belongs to this group?

That part of my response was aimed mainly at the people trolling, flaming and mocking the notion of animal cruelty. I have no illusion of enlightening such people and they deserve to be insulted. Again, anyone decide for themself if they feel spoken to when it comes to that.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My entire reaction to this thread is LOLWUT?

Every time I meet someone like this I can't help but think that they are Luddites - it seems to me that the current progress of the human race was built on the backs of slavery of humans and animals.

Neither a human nor an animal is significantly different than any other collection of star-forged atoms (such as an iron deposit). I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.

I'll take that challenge...

If you actually believe and live by your last statement, you'd be a psychopath by society's standards and kill humans or animals without remorse or empathy as they are 'just a collection of atoms'. Self aware beings that we are, we measure ourselves by rules we implement via our collectives in order to maintain structure. I don't run over a pedestrian in the way of my intended car parking spot or shoot someone in the head when wanting to get ahead in the queue to pay for my groceries because I have a measure of empathy for the other people around me, this extends, to a lesser degree, to animal life around me and when I've hunted or fished, I have tried to ensure I minimize the suffering of the animal I intend to eat because I understand pain and do not wish to extend that unpleasant experience to another being.
We seek to reduce the suffering of other living things due to the level of empathy we possess as a cognitive being capable of recognizing similarities with other life forms.

Honestly, laws prevent me from running over pedestrians while parking or shooting people in front of me in line. If laws against murder and running down pedestrians didn't exist, you'd bet that I'd be first in line with my bloodstained front bumper every time.

And where is this glorification of empathy coming from? I understand pain. I do not wish to inflict it upon others for sheer enjoyment. But if there is a single good reason to do so (such as making brushes or rushing to a parking spot) then I think it is silly to allow one's empathy to interfere with one's efficiency.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My entire reaction to this thread is LOLWUT?

Every time I meet someone like this I can't help but think that they are Luddites - it seems to me that the current progress of the human race was built on the backs of slavery of humans and animals.

That is funny, because I happen to have those exact thought about people who'se reaction to this thread is LOLWUT.

The last part of your post I bolded is exactly right, but that doesn't mean it is/was justified in any kind of way. As far as I'm concerned it is part of our evolution as a race to abolish all such thing.

 TBD wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My entire reaction to this thread is LOLWUT?

Every time I meet someone like this I can't help but think that they are Luddites - it seems to me that the current progress of the human race was built on the backs of slavery of humans and animals.

That is funny, because I happen to have those exact thought about people who'se reaction to this thread is LOLWUT.

The last part of your post I bolded is exactly right, but that doesn't mean it is/was justified in any kind of way. As far as I'm concerned it is part of our evolution as a race to abolish all such thing.

I don't think its part of our evolution. Otherwise, evolution would do it and we would all feel this way as a species.

Maybe you think our social / cultural evolution should do it - in that case, I hope you see that the culture that is always careful not to hurt a fly will always be overrun by the culture willing to sacrifice animals and even people on the altar of efficiency in any sort of direct competition.

I actually understand the difficulties you face - my wife is a vegetarian, whereas I am a carnivore, so when we got together, it was a complete rethink for me on the way I do things - 'can't stir that pan with this spoon, cos I've just stirred the mince with it'. It can be tricky, but where I get frustrated is with the inherent hypocrisy that exists at the same time. (See the electric car example as one, there are many others).

I think that a synthetic brush is at its base level, at least as environmentally damaging as a sable one.

Good luck finding the brush you're looking for though.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Horse gak.

Weasels, foxes, chimpanzees, marmots, prawns, beluga whales, sea anemones, dogs, humming birds and, oh yeah, every other species on the face of the earth are incapable of sadism. It's entirely a human quality.

Not true. Chimpanzees torture and mutilate rival troops when they fight in turf wars as a way to intimidate and establish territory. It is not uncommon for them to beat and torture the young of other troops and purposefully keep the alive as long as possible in order to have the screams be heard by their families and then after the rival is dead, they play with the corpse and parts of the body for fun.

Anyone who says Humans invented war and hate need to research our closest cousins.

nkelsch wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Horse gak.

Weasels, foxes, chimpanzees, marmots, prawns, beluga whales, sea anemones, dogs, humming birds and, oh yeah, every other species on the face of the earth are incapable of sadism. It's entirely a human quality.

Not true. Chimpanzees torture and mutilate rival troops when they fight in turf wars as a way to intimidate and establish territory. It is not uncommon for them to beat and torture the young of other troops and purposefully keep the alive as long as possible in order to have the screams be heard by their families and then after the rival is dead, they play with the corpse and parts of the body for fun.

Anyone who says Humans invented war and hate need to research our closest cousins.

That isn't sadism, sadism is derived pleasure from the suffering of others and there's nothing to establish that chimps are experiencing the human emotion. It's a common falsehood to ascribe the crimes and negative emotions of humans to animals, especially higher mammals, but they are not humans, therefore they don't commit ethically bad behaviours as they have no ethics to be guided by. Humans calling another animal 'cruel' or 'hateful' are simply ascribing the worse of humanity onto animals incorrectly. A chimpanzee isn't employing hate or war, it's employing territorial behaviours that our morality finds abhorrent if we tack it onto another species.

It's pointless.

So are we all murders for eating chicken? cows? drink milk?

Animals are there for us to "use" as a source of meat. etc

I've noticed that brushes made from weasels that suffered horrible deaths work much better and last way longer.



Farmed animals exist and are over bred for exactly 1 reason: they are products. Just like plants(which are just as much alive as animals), they are bred with the specific purpose of dying to produce something we can use.

You think the current population of cows is natural? or chickens? Or corn? They are over populated because we then kill them back down.

Furthermore, we are top of the food chain and as such reap the benefits of that status.

You think that carnivorous animals try "humane" tactics to get their meals? They kill as brutally and efficiently as possible to get what they want. So is every lion out there guilty of some manner of cruelty?

Death is not cruel, it is natural.

Now as for the living conditions of farmed animals, I agree that while they are alive they should be better treated, but that alone isn't enough to make me stop consuming them.


Would you feel better if we all started raising our own weasels, shaving them and sending the hair to Rosemary & Co to make my brushes for me?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

I'll take that challenge...
If you actually believe and live by your last statement, you'd be a psychopath by society's standards and kill humans or animals without remorse or empathy as they are 'just a collection of atoms'. Self aware beings that we are, we measure ourselves by rules we implement via our collectives in order to maintain structure. I don't run over a pedestrian in the way of my intended car parking spot or shoot someone in the head when wanting to get ahead in the queue to pay for my groceries because I have a measure of empathy for the other people around me, this extends, to a lesser degree, to animal life around me and when I've hunted or fished, I have tried to ensure I minimize the suffering of the animal I intend to eat because I understand pain and do not wish to extend that unpleasant experience to another being.
We seek to reduce the suffering of other living things due to the level of empathy we possess as a cognitive being capable of recognizing similarities with other life forms.

Honestly, laws prevent me from running over pedestrians while parking or shooting people in front of me in line. If laws against murder and running down pedestrians didn't exist, you'd bet that I'd be first in line with my bloodstained front bumper every time.
And where is this glorification of empathy coming from? I understand pain. I do not wish to inflict it upon others for sheer enjoyment. But if there is a single good reason to do so (such as making brushes or rushing to a parking spot) then I think it is silly to allow one's empathy to interfere with one's efficiency.

/coolstorybro.gif

Roadkill Zombie wrote:
This whole thread brings up a wierd encounter I had with a so called animal rights activist once.... I was like

She seemed more interested in having someone prosecuted rather than any real animal rescue.

As I have since come into contact with more and more animal rights activists, I have seen that this is a common attiude among many of them.

So I have to ask you. Since you know there is a problem, what are you personally doing to fix it? Coming on to a website about miniature games isn't really gonna solve the problem.

Are you going to start your own paint brush company that doesn't kill the animals? Are you going to point anyone in the direction of good companies that don't kill to make the brushes? Are you actively going to the paint brush company and standing outside with a bunch of other protestors holding signs and making the public aware of the problem besides just coming onto dakka and mentioning it? Are you getting involved in legislation that will try to stop the cruelty?

If you are, good for you. If not......then I question the motives behind the thread because it doesn't seem you are informed enough about the subject.

That woman deserves your , and so does anyone who thinks alike to her. Care about the animal first, and care about holding someone responsible second. Being able to do both is preferable, but the first should always have priority.

If you scroll though this thread you would see a post by MGS that points to animal friendly brushes, and at least one person owned up to not being aware and agreeing, so those are all positives to begin with. Standing outside with signs is almost always useless. I don't believe in that as a means to achieve something at all, unless it is done at a massive level. And about the legislation the Netherlands just passed, or is about to pass, legislation that forbids this particular industry in the future.

I hope you don't wear wool fibers...

 Marthike wrote:
So are we all murders for eating chicken? cows? drink milk?

Animals are there for us to "use" as a source of meat. etc

No, we are not murderers, he's not saying that.

The argument against using weasel fur in paint brushes is the same as the argument against the fur coat industry, that it is a needless and wasteful way to treat animals, that it is likely unregulated and cruel.

The original brushes were horse hair, I know we can harvest hair from horses without killing them, why not reexamine why that fell from favor? I also linked some synthetics that I intend to try out myself, that would also seem a decent solution.

If we are to use animal products that come from an animal that dies, why not examine the animals we already kill for food and consume the greater part of.

Also, synthetic brushes suck terribly. They are only good for oil and alcohol based work.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My entire reaction to this thread is LOLWUT?

Every time I meet someone like this I can't help but think that they are Luddites - it seems to me that the current progress of the human race was built on the backs of slavery of humans and animals.

Neither a human nor an animal is significantly different than any other collection of star-forged atoms (such as an iron deposit). I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.

I'll take that challenge...

If you actually believe and live by your last statement, you'd be a psychopath by society's standards and kill humans or animals without remorse or empathy as they are 'just a collection of atoms'. Self aware beings that we are, we measure ourselves by rules we implement via our collectives in order to maintain structure. I don't run over a pedestrian in the way of my intended car parking spot or shoot someone in the head when wanting to get ahead in the queue to pay for my groceries because I have a measure of empathy for the other people around me, this extends, to a lesser degree, to animal life around me and when I've hunted or fished, I have tried to ensure I minimize the suffering of the animal I intend to eat because I understand pain and do not wish to extend that unpleasant experience to another being.
We seek to reduce the suffering of other living things due to the level of empathy we possess as a cognitive being capable of recognizing similarities with other life forms.

Great post.

For me at the base of it all it is about respect for all other life, ESPECIALLY since we (mankind) have all the power to do as we please upon it. We should be shepherd instead of (ab)users.

nkelsch wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Horse gak.

Weasels, foxes, chimpanzees, marmots, prawns, beluga whales, sea anemones, dogs, humming birds and, oh yeah, every other species on the face of the earth are incapable of sadism. It's entirely a human quality.

Not true. Chimpanzees torture and mutilate rival troops when they fight in turf wars as a way to intimidate and establish territory. It is not uncommon for them to beat and torture the young of other troops and purposefully keep the alive as long as possible in order to have the screams be heard by their families and then after the rival is dead, they play with the corpse and parts of the body for fun.

Anyone who says Humans invented war and hate need to research our closest cousins.

couple things wrong with this statement.

1. the behaviour of chimps that you mentioned before is most likely to prove the superiorority of the alpha male in the troop,

2. we did invent war, because although violent struggles for survival do take place in nature it is NEVER on the indutrial scale of humanitys warfare.

TBD, im actually inclined to side with you, but throwing the brushes away doesnt solve anything, really its just a waste of that animals life as the reason it was killed was to make those brushes. all that throwing them away did was show the animal that its death was in vain.

And also GW probably doesnt care about this so the legal ban of lead shot for wildfowling is more likely to happen....

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Lead Farmer wrote:
As a person who keeps hens for eggs as a way to reduce animal cruelty in a very real way, I hate these kinds of animals as they will frequently break into the chicken coop and slaughter all the birds for no other reason but the pure joy of it. The don't eat anything. Killing these things reduces animal cruelty. This whole group of animals is sadistic.

Horse gak.

Weasels, foxes, chimpanzees, marmots, prawns, beluga whales, sea anemones, dogs, humming birds and, oh yeah, every other species on the face of the earth are incapable of sadism. It's entirely a human quality.

Okay then, have a read of these:

http://www.cracked.com/article_16762_the-6-biggest-donkey-caves-in-animal-kingdom.html
http://www.cracked.com/article_19263_the-6-most-disturbingly-evil-birds.html

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Horse gak.

Weasels, foxes, chimpanzees, marmots, prawns, beluga whales, sea anemones, dogs, humming birds and, oh yeah, every other species on the face of the earth are incapable of sadism. It's entirely a human quality.

Not true. Chimpanzees torture and mutilate rival troops when they fight in turf wars as a way to intimidate and establish territory. It is not uncommon for them to beat and torture the young of other troops and purposefully keep the alive as long as possible in order to have the screams be heard by their families and then after the rival is dead, they play with the corpse and parts of the body for fun.

Anyone who says Humans invented war and hate need to research our closest cousins.

That isn't sadism, sadism is derived pleasure from the suffering of others and there's nothing to establish that chimps are experiencing the human emotion. It's a common falsehood to ascribe the crimes and negative emotions of humans to animals, especially higher mammals, but they are not humans, therefore they don't commit ethically bad behaviours as they have no ethics to be guided by. Humans calling another animal 'cruel' or 'hateful' are simply ascribing the worse of humanity onto animals incorrectly. A chimpanzee isn't employing hate or war, it's employing territorial behaviours that our morality finds abhorrent if we tack it onto another species.

It's pointless.

Animals feel joy... what we as humans lack is the ability to scientifically determine if these animals are enjoying their actions or not. It is a scientific unknown and you absolute definition of emotion as a human trait is a biological unknown by scientists.

Primate anthropologists would 100% disagree with you that they do not have WAR and there are many who have observed chimpanzees torturing which is beyond simple 'killing' and that the act of torture is required to send a signal to other chimpanzees. They have a sense of 'self' and can understand that not only will they die if they go there, but in a painful, slow and drawn out way. This means this is worse than the death of simply starving and they are to not risk it. So they can experience sadness, joy loss, but somehow it is impossible to believe these animals might enjoy the actions they are doing? the unnecessary actions of live torture and then the displays of corpse defiling? Some may not, but to say none of them ever are capable is sure a bold scientifically supported stretch.

Chimpanzees to wage war, do torture and arguably it is unknown if they enjoy what they are doing but are capable of enjoying themselves. There is always room in any species for a 'deviant' who would commit extreme acts outside the natural behavior of the species and enjoy doing things potentially counter to thier species existence.

There are scientifically confirmed incidents of primates seeming to torture and murder animals for no reason but enjoyment, Until they can track brainwaves they have no way of confirming.

You can have sadist tendencies without morality.

boyd wrote:
I hope you don't wear wool fibers...

I hope you understand how wool is obtained vs fur farming/pelt hunting...

 TBD wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 TBD wrote:

I'm not sure to what extent the Siberian Weasel is considered a pest, but that is not where these brushes come from. They are made of farmed animals.

As someone else said, this is incorrect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Weasel
The hairs are harvested from animals caught (and killed) in the wild. Siberian weasels do not live in breeding farms.

I wish it was incorrect, but it really isn't.

Maybe that is where they get part of the hair too, but hair of farmed animals is also definitely used. You tell me which came from where?

The whole "this animal is a pest anyway" story isn't so clear cut either as long as there are commercial intersts involved, as always.

Many people have shown evidence that Kolinsky sable brushes are not made from farm bred animals.
You continue to assert ant isn't true.
Please show some evidence. Or prove that GW brushes use some other kind of fur. Because your assertion that "these brushes" come from something other than that would be false advertising and rather more trouble than just an accusation of animal cruelty.

nkelsch wrote:

Animals feel joy... what we as humans lack is the ability to scientifically determine if these animals are enjoying their actions or not. It is a scientific unknown and you absolute definition of emotion as a human trait is a biological unknown by scientists.

Primate anthropologists would 100% disagree with you that they do not have WAR and there are many who have observed chimpanzees torturing which is beyond simple 'killing' and that the acto of torture is required to send a signal to other chimpanzees.

Chimpanzees to wage war, do torture and arguably it is unknown if they enjoy what they are doing but are capable of enjoying themselves. There is always room in any species for a 'deviant' who would commit extreme acts outside the natural behavior of the species and enjoy doing things potentially counter to thier species existence.

There are scientifically confirmed incidents of primates seeming to torture and murder animals for no reason but enjoyment, Until they can track brainwaves they have no way of confirming.

You can have sadist tendencies without morality.

Joy, War, Torture, Sadism.

All human concepts and ascribing them to animal behavior is emotive, projective and unscientific.

Animals can demonstrate bonding, supportive behaviors to one another or hostile, aggressive behaviors. There are scientific incidents of primates performing actions we can call torture or murder, but calling them either detracts from the fact they aren't either, they are just animal behaviors, not emotive human moral behavior.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
That isn't sadism, sadism is derived pleasure from the suffering of others and there's nothing to establish that chimps are experiencing the human emotion. It's a common falsehood to ascribe the crimes and negative emotions of humans to animals, especially higher mammals, but they are not humans, therefore they don't commit ethically bad behaviours as they have no ethics to be guided by. Humans calling another animal 'cruel' or 'hateful' are simply ascribing the worse of humanity onto animals incorrectly. A chimpanzee isn't employing hate or war, it's employing territorial behaviours that our morality finds abhorrent if we tack it onto another species.

It's pointless.

Pretty sure cats are sadistic. There are thousands of videos on YouTube to back that assumption as well.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Animals feel joy... what we as humans lack is the ability to scientifically determine if these animals are enjoying their actions or not. It is a scientific unknown and you absolute definition of emotion as a human trait is a biological unknown by scientists.

Primate anthropologists would 100% disagree with you that they do not have WAR and there are many who have observed chimpanzees torturing which is beyond simple 'killing' and that the acto of torture is required to send a signal to other chimpanzees.

Chimpanzees to wage war, do torture and arguably it is unknown if they enjoy what they are doing but are capable of enjoying themselves. There is always room in any species for a 'deviant' who would commit extreme acts outside the natural behavior of the species and enjoy doing things potentially counter to thier species existence.

There are scientifically confirmed incidents of primates seeming to torture and murder animals for no reason but enjoyment, Until they can track brainwaves they have no way of confirming.

You can have sadist tendencies without morality.

Joy, War, Torture, Sadism.

All human concepts and ascribing them to animal behavior is emotive, projective and unscientific.

Animals can demonstrate bonding, supportive behaviors to one another or hostile, aggressive behaviors. There are scientific incidents of primates performing actions we can call torture or murder, but calling them either detracts from the fact they aren't either, they are just animal behaviors, not emotive human moral behavior.

So, to use one of the examples from the links I provided. If Dolphins killing Porpoises simply for gaks and giggles isn't sadism then what is it huh?

Go on then, I'll wait.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Honestly, laws prevent me from running over pedestrians while parking or shooting people in front of me in line. If laws against murder and running down pedestrians didn't exist, you'd bet that I'd be first in line with my bloodstained front bumper every time.

And where is this glorification of empathy coming from? I understand pain. I do not wish to inflict it upon others for sheer enjoyment. But if there is a single good reason to do so (such as making brushes or rushing to a parking spot) then I think it is silly to allow one's empathy to interfere with one's efficiency.

-Slowly backs away-
No offense man, you are making yourself look bad with every word you say.
The reason people are finding these claims weird is the idea that you are saying its horrible and atrocious that the one of the many things in this world which are killed for human use which you call for animal cruelty...Is weasels fur used to make paintbrushes?

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Animals feel joy... what we as humans lack is the ability to scientifically determine if these animals are enjoying their actions or not. It is a scientific unknown and you absolute definition of emotion as a human trait is a biological unknown by scientists.

Primate anthropologists would 100% disagree with you that they do not have WAR and there are many who have observed chimpanzees torturing which is beyond simple 'killing' and that the acto of torture is required to send a signal to other chimpanzees.

Chimpanzees to wage war, do torture and arguably it is unknown if they enjoy what they are doing but are capable of enjoying themselves. There is always room in any species for a 'deviant' who would commit extreme acts outside the natural behavior of the species and enjoy doing things potentially counter to thier species existence.

There are scientifically confirmed incidents of primates seeming to torture and murder animals for no reason but enjoyment, Until they can track brainwaves they have no way of confirming.

You can have sadist tendencies without morality.

Joy, War, Torture, Sadism.

All human concepts and ascribing them to animal behavior is emotive, projective and unscientific.

Animals can demonstrate bonding, supportive behaviors to one another or hostile, aggressive behaviors. There are scientific incidents of primates performing actions we can call torture or murder, but calling them either detracts from the fact they aren't either, they are just animal behaviors, not emotive human moral behavior.

Real scientists will totally disagree with you. In fact there are entire fields of SCIENCE based around the application of human psychology to primates and other animals because it is actually real and has actual evidence that these animals not only have emotions but behaviors just like humans and other higher-thinking animals. After all, we are simply primates so to think somehow we are different from them is arrogance and unscientific. They are emotive behaviors and 'torture' can happen without moral applications. The act of causing pain and drawing it out for no practical purpose except to cause harm to the target completely lacks a moral aspect to it. Killing a rival to maintain foodstore is different from torturing an animal to have its cries heard and keeping it explicitly alive to extend the pain... the only reason an animal would do so is to know the animal it expects to hear said sounds will have a response to those actions, hopefully a 'feth you, I tortured your baby' response.

You can say animals have no morals, but you can't say they are incapable of emotions or actions. Real scientists disagree with you as Chimpanzees having war and torture is scientific fact and certainty and there is evidence that not only do animals kill and torture, but that they are capable of enjoying it. I would say higher the brain functions of the animal species, the more you will find such behaviors and ranges of emotions. To assume only humans have the brainpower and sense of self to have emotions or do anything 'wrong' is supreme arrogance that we are the most evolved thing on the planet.

As soon as we make sure all the humans on earth are being treated without cruelty or neglect I will worry about the animals. *takes cover*

For all we know GW does get the hair from natural sheddings or they believe they do.
Also, I view the op's point as agreeable, but my view is that my brushes most likely come from by-products so me not using them makes no difference, so I use them. If someone can provide concrete evidence that everything I said is not the case I'll change, till then... I need a new standard brush.