Nekaj odlomkov iz intervjuja s kontroverznim bioetikom Petrom Singerjem s komentarji.
1. “I’ve become a little more open to the idea that if we rear animals in ways that give them good lives and take care to make sure that they do not suffer when they are killed, then that’s a defensible ethical position.”
Izjava odraža Singerjevo spremenjeno stališče glede etike uživanja živali. Prej je idejo o prehranjevanju z živalmi povsem zavračal, zdaj pa meni, da bi bilo uživanje živali lahko etično upravičeno, če so humano vzrejene in ubite brez trpljenja. To sicer ne pomeni, da takšno stališče podpira, vendar ga priznava kot veljavno etično držo.
2. “But the greenhouse gas emissions are very high from ruminant animals because they produce methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas. By comparison, chickens don’t produce methane and so there’s much less of a climate change implication in eating chicken. But most chicken is factory-farmed.”
Singer razpravlja o vplivu različnih vrst proizvodnje mesa na okolje. Prežvekovalci, kot so krave, proizvajajo metan, močan toplogredni plin, ki pomembno prispeva k podnebnim spremembam. Po drugi strani pa piščanci ne proizvajajo metana, zaradi česar ima uživanje piščancev manjši vpliv na podnebje. Vendar pa je večina piščancev gojenih industrijsko, kar vzbuja resne pomisleke glede dobrega počutja živali.
3. “I am totally appalled by the plans and the idea of 1 million of these intelligent, sentient beings being closely confined and then killed. I hope it can be stopped.”
Izjava je odziv na predlog za vzpostavitev farme hobotnic na Kanarskih otokih. Singer odločno nasprotuje tej zamisli in poudarja inteligenco in čutnost hobotnic ter etične posledice njihovega zapiranja in ubijanja za hrano.
4. “Most of the AIs, if you say: ‘Can you give me some recipes for cooking pork?’, they will do it immediately. But if you say: ‘Can you give me some recipes for cooking dogs?’, most of them will say: ‘No, it’s wrong to cook dogs.’ Why is it wrong to cook dogs and not wrong to cook pigs?”
Singer poudarja vrstno pristranskost sistemov umetne inteligence, ki odražajo pristranskost družbenih okolij, v katerih so se urili. Sprašuje se, zakaj sistemi umetne inteligence zlahka ponudijo recepte za kuhanje nekaterih živali (npr. prašičev), za druge (npr. pse) pa tega nočejo storiti, s čimer opozarja na nedoslednost in pristranskost v našem odnosu do različnih živalskih vrst.
5. “We need to consider what we can do to reduce the damage that climate change is doing and will do in future. Our children and grandchildren are going to ask us, what did we do to stop the problems they are going to have to live with?”
Singer poudarja, da se je treba podnebnih sprememb nujno lotiti ne le zaradi nas, temveč tudi zaradi prihodnjih generacij. Predlaga, da etično življenje v kontekstu podnebnih sprememb vključuje resne ukrepe za ublažitev učinkov tega pojava.
6. “I think it would be perfectly reasonable for governments to impose taxes on beef, lamb and dairy – the products that are doing most damage to the climate.”
Singer predlaga politični ukrep za reševanje vpliva živinoreje na okolje. Prepričan je, da bi z obdavčitvijo izdelkov, ki znatno prispevajo k emisijam toplogrednih plinov, lahko zmanjšali porabo in tako ublažili podnebne spremembe.
7. “Now, we have a deeper understanding of the intelligence of many animals, from pigs to octopuses, as well as evidence to show that veganism – which is more popular than ever – is good for our health and the environment.”
Singer priznava napredek pri razumevanju živalske inteligence in prednosti veganstva. Domneva, da bi lahko večja ozaveščenost in dokazi vplivali na odnos družbe do pravic živali in izbire prehrane.
8. “I regard it as a kind of unsolved philosophical problem.”
Ta izjava se nanaša na etično dilemo uživanja živali, ki so bile humano vzrejene in ubite brez trpljenja. Singer priznava, da je to vprašanje zapleteno in nima jasne rešitve.
9. “I think people who are conscientious about ensuring that any meat they buy comes from animals who have had good lives – they hold a position that I’m not prepared to say flatly is immoral or wrong.”
Singer izraža spoštovanje do etičnega položaja posameznikov, ki si zavestno prizadevajo uživati meso živali, ki so bile vzrejene humano. Čeprav se s tem stališčem ne strinja nujno, ga tudi kategorično ne obsoja.
10. “Our children and grandchildren are going to ask us, what did we do to stop the problems they are going to have to live with? I think we want to be able to give them an honest and serious answer that we did a great deal, that we did everything we could to prevent this damage.”
Singer poudarja odgovornost, ki jo imamo do prihodnjih generacij pri obravnavi podnebnih sprememb. Predvideva, da bodo naši potomci pod drobnogled vzeli naša današnja dejanja, zato si moramo prizadevati, da jim bomo lahko povedali, da smo storili vse, kar je v naši moči, da bi zmanjšali škodo, ki jo povzročajo podnebne spremembe.
Viri
- Peter Singer on animal rights, octopus farms and why AI is speciesist, 31. maj 2023, New Scientist.
