Question for Dr. Nussbaum: do you believe that there's a moral difference between the suffering that humans inflict on nonhuman animals and the suffering that nonhuman animals inflict on each other? If so, why?
I favor the move to lab-grown meat, but we should be clear-eyed that what this will probably mean for domestic animal populations: a pleasant enough life in retirement for a final generation, followed by the effective extinction of most breeds currently being raised, both mammals and poultry, except for any needed by the surviving dairy industry. Some flocks will undoubtedly be sold abroad to countries that will continue to raise animals for food, and sheep, which are better treated than animals raised for slaughter anyway, will continue to be raised commercially for wool, although the economics of the wool trade will change with the rejection of lamb and mutton.
The history of the horse in the United States is instructive. In 1910 horses were still economically significant, and their population peaked at almost 20 million. With the mechanization of agriculture and transportation the horse population steadily declined, bottoming out in 1974 at less than 1.6 million. There's been some population increase since, but the horse is an iconic animal, and it's not uncommon for people with the means to keep them as pets. I wouldn't expect beef cattle, pigs, turkeys, chickens, or other livestock raised principally for meat to make that transition.
Matthew Scully's book, "Dominion", permanently changed my views on factory farming and the suffering of animals, for the better. I was pleased to see it get an approving callout in Professor Nussbaum's book, and look forward to reading her take on the subject more fully.
Question for Dr. Nussbaum: do you believe that there's a moral difference between the suffering that humans inflict on nonhuman animals and the suffering that nonhuman animals inflict on each other? If so, why?
I favor the move to lab-grown meat, but we should be clear-eyed that what this will probably mean for domestic animal populations: a pleasant enough life in retirement for a final generation, followed by the effective extinction of most breeds currently being raised, both mammals and poultry, except for any needed by the surviving dairy industry. Some flocks will undoubtedly be sold abroad to countries that will continue to raise animals for food, and sheep, which are better treated than animals raised for slaughter anyway, will continue to be raised commercially for wool, although the economics of the wool trade will change with the rejection of lamb and mutton.
The history of the horse in the United States is instructive. In 1910 horses were still economically significant, and their population peaked at almost 20 million. With the mechanization of agriculture and transportation the horse population steadily declined, bottoming out in 1974 at less than 1.6 million. There's been some population increase since, but the horse is an iconic animal, and it's not uncommon for people with the means to keep them as pets. I wouldn't expect beef cattle, pigs, turkeys, chickens, or other livestock raised principally for meat to make that transition.
https://datapaddock.com/usda-horse-total-1850-2012/
This was an engaging conversation and I found Dr Nussbaum's positions admirable. Thanks for the excellent episode, Yascha!
Matthew Scully's book, "Dominion", permanently changed my views on factory farming and the suffering of animals, for the better. I was pleased to see it get an approving callout in Professor Nussbaum's book, and look forward to reading her take on the subject more fully.