Guilt and Embarrassment

In response to Brian - full post here

This is actually quite the interesting topic. I think, in general, I would agree with you. Since there is no reliable way to determine what animal humiliation would look like, it would be difficult to be able to actually determine if a non-human animal has a sense of humiliation.

I also agree that it is likely that a number of animals probably don't experience embarrassment simply because they are not social and would therefore have no use for those feelings; crocodiles don't care about the feelings and thoughts of other crocodiles.

Still, I am wondering about the similarities between humilation/embarrassment and guilt. I am inclined to say that many non-human animals do experience guilt; wolves and dogs come to mind as animals who can feel guilty. It seems that guilt and embarrassment/humiliation function similarly to a similar end. So, it seems, if these two are related, that it's likely that some non-human animals can experience something close to humiliation. However, since guilt and embarrassment are socially learned responses, it seems unlikely that zoos and aquariums would provoke such feelings from non-human animals. Still, it might be the case that more intelligent animals would be able to learn the social cues that would warrant guilt in humans.

Relevance of Culture

In response to Perri - full post here

I think I would agree with your assessment of the relevance of culture in reference to hunting. I would also extend this argument to most other moral issues.

I am not inclined to think that culture is relevant to most discussions of morality. It is true that we should respect different cultures, but I do not think that respecting other culture can extend to the mistreatment of others. If it was the practice of one culture to knock five times on a door, open it, cross the threshold, count to 3, step backwards, do a handstand, cross the threshold again, and spin thrice before remaining in a room, I think that we should respect that because, as far as we can tell, it objectively does not harm others.

However, if the practices of hunting and animal consumption are maintained for cultural reasons, then I think it is fair to say that culture is not relevant to the discussion. As far as we can tell, the truth of animal suffering is objective; the capacity for animals to experience pain is not diminished based on the culture in which the animal lives. The same thing can be true of slavery and other forms of oppression and objectification.

There are, of course, many situations in which the appropriate reaction is not clear. While many people in western society would consider it abuse to come home from work and deal three slaps across the face and a punch to stomach, if it was part of a culture for a woman to come home from work and beat her agender spouse in the aforementioned ways, and if the agender spouse were to consent their wife beating them, then we should respect this difference in culture. We should certainly make sure that the object of these actions are actually consenting, but beyond that we have little right to interfere.