I would say I feel good when I hear that a given place has banned bullfighting, and find the practice horrifying. My claim is in the context of the animal welfare movement and how it should spend its resources.
Bullfighting causes intense suffering to a few thousand bulls, for a few hours each. This makes it a very small issue in a consequentialist, most likely less than 0.000001% of the suffering caused by the egg industry on a yearly basis. Then, the counterfactual impact of a single spectator at a bullfight on the outcome is probably low. It doesnāt seem like something altruistic resources are well-spent on.
Meanwhile, I donāt see attitude change as a clear a step toward a better world for animals. āA better world for animalsā is a hideously complicated thing, and currently has little to no correlation with peopleās attitudes. French people burnt cats alive for fun in the 16th century, but factory farming didnāt exist and human-caused suffering to animals was surely <1% of what it was today. A more pro-animal nation may contain more animal suffering (more pesticides, eating smaller and more numerous animals...). And I currently have no reason to believe that there is less total suffering in countries that have banned bullfighting entirely.
I totally agree on the consequentialist part. Regarding value change, I find Oscar Hortaās line of reasoning quite compelling. Value changes might take some time to materialize into actual improvements, but when they do, the effects tend to be long-lasting. For example, we still struggle with certain ideas of Descartes more than 400 years after his death.
On the positive side, the only reason why cage-free campaigns can be successful is that people genuinely care. When it comes to AI, my personal opinion is that values are incredibly important. If these systems become even more powerful than they already are, I would certainly prefer them to think that bullfights are appalling, rather than deciding it is a good idea to book tickets for them without even being asked.
Thanks for engaging!
I would say I feel good when I hear that a given place has banned bullfighting, and find the practice horrifying. My claim is in the context of the animal welfare movement and how it should spend its resources.
Bullfighting causes intense suffering to a few thousand bulls, for a few hours each. This makes it a very small issue in a consequentialist, most likely less than 0.000001% of the suffering caused by the egg industry on a yearly basis. Then, the counterfactual impact of a single spectator at a bullfight on the outcome is probably low. It doesnāt seem like something altruistic resources are well-spent on.
Meanwhile, I donāt see attitude change as a clear a step toward a better world for animals. āA better world for animalsā is a hideously complicated thing, and currently has little to no correlation with peopleās attitudes. French people burnt cats alive for fun in the 16th century, but factory farming didnāt exist and human-caused suffering to animals was surely <1% of what it was today. A more pro-animal nation may contain more animal suffering (more pesticides, eating smaller and more numerous animals...). And I currently have no reason to believe that there is less total suffering in countries that have banned bullfighting entirely.
I totally agree on the consequentialist part. Regarding value change, I find Oscar Hortaās line of reasoning quite compelling. Value changes might take some time to materialize into actual improvements, but when they do, the effects tend to be long-lasting. For example, we still struggle with certain ideas of Descartes more than 400 years after his death.
On the positive side, the only reason why cage-free campaigns can be successful is that people genuinely care. When it comes to AI, my personal opinion is that values are incredibly important. If these systems become even more powerful than they already are, I would certainly prefer them to think that bullfights are appalling, rather than deciding it is a good idea to book tickets for them without even being asked.