[extropy-chat] cow paradox

[Mike Lorrey]

a) land owners cannot be held liable for the allegedly yahoo antics of
hunters.
b) hunters, the stats say, are actually better citizens, on average,
than non-hunters, so any given land owner should prefer to have hunters
on his or her land rather than, say, tree huggers, so watch out for
brain addled mushroom munching and pot smoking tree huggers as a
greater risk to your property (and what one might think of doing to
your cows when one is stoned, speaking of cow-pokers).
c) while eating fish spares them a painful death from mercury
poisoning, doing so is merely transferring the risk to yourself.
d) free range buffalo are healthier for you to eat than farm raised
cattle.
e) farm raised fish are healthier for you than free range fish (ponder
the paradox of points (d) and (e)).

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Since we seem to be in the mood to think about
> logical paradox, please someone help me find the
> error in this one.
> 
> I am one who cares about animals, I like them.
> But I am not a vegetarian, for I reason that by
> purchasing and devouring cows, I create a market
> for them, thus compelling cowboys and cowpokes
> to raise them for a living.  {How do cowboys get
> promoted to cowpokes?  On second thought, please
> do not answer that, I don't think I want to know.}
> 
> If we devour cows, we give them an opportunity
> to live to their adolescence which is, one would
> suppose, preferable to not living at all.  I had
> a lot of fun as a child and early teen.  If given
> a choice of having those years, then being slain
> and devoured, I would choose a short life over 
> never being born at all.
> 
> One argues that if humans did not raise cattle, then
> buffalo would have that much more room to be born
> and live full lives, and a buffalo is kinda like
> a big cow, so there you have it.  I find this
> argument unconvincing, for the owners of that land
> would not wish to carry the liability risk of yahoos
> illegally entering their land to play Indian (wildly
> galloping around bareback, twanging stone-tipped arrows 
> at the panicked buffalo, counting many coup, etc, which 
> you *know* is a fun-sounding testosterone-charged activity.)
> 
> One could purchase steaks, then instead of devouring
> same, could give them a decent burial in the back yard,
> but then of course one would still need to devour 
> something else, thus using up land that could otherwise
> be used for wild buffalo.  The neighbors might not
> care for it either.
> 
> Similarly, for those of us who devour fish (early,
> often and cheerfully) we are doing a good deed if
> we devour only farmed fish.  But if our sushi is caught 
> from the wild we prevent the hapless beasts from 
> living on to a happy middle age and eventually
> being devoured by a larger fish.
> 
> The cow paradox has been hashed over at least twice
> before on extropians, so do not feel compelled to
> comment.  But any new insight is welcome.  I am
> ready to conclude that this old world is hopelessly
> mired in ethical paradox.
> 
> spike
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Domains – Claim yours for only $14.70/year
http://smallbusiness.promotions.yahoo.com/offer