Discussion in 'Odds & Ends' started by Steady Eddy, Mar 15, 2011.
We have a lobster buttocks expert here
Well, you certainly knew it was fresh
I mentioned this to my aunt's husband one time when we were discussing having a lobster dinner. He said the best thing to do is to chill it before cooking it-apparently the creature won't feel anything. Isn't there a way to kill the lobster and then cook it?
Since they literally die screaming, yes it's cruel.
The real joke is on the people who eat them. Lobsters are essentially sea cockroaches. Bon appetit!
I'm pretty sure many of us have already linked websites to scientific research that states: Lobsters do not feel pain. Hence, the answer to the thread's title is:
So many of those links go like this, such and such study confirms that lobsters cannot feel pain, but two other studies show that they do feel pain. Back and forth, back and forth. It mentions that lobsters have a violent reaction to being put in boiling water, and, I've learned that most people who prepare lobsters this way, leave the kitchen while this is going on. I hadn't known this. To those who believe the lobster isn't bothered, would you be bothered hearing the lobster bang on the kettle while cooking? I would hate being around that, despite, intellectually, being more persuaded that lobsters aren't aware of anything.
I had put in a song request from them called The Heat is On, but that post seems to have been deleted!
In my place, they behead chickens and put them in a box, and shut the lid. The chicken (or hen) jumps around beheaded in a box with dozens of other heads and skins for a few minutes before dying. Then people eat it.
Morals do not count as research.
Right, but go to the links provided by LegendofBorg, and you'll read,
There are studies that show lobster's don't feel pain, too. What's a diner to do?
I read David Foster Wallace's, "Consider the Lobster". That didn't really draw any conclusions but I was surprised to read that lobsters put up such a fuss that most cooks leave the area. I'm sure if I cooked a lobster I'd be too upset to enjoy eating it. Maybe that's dumb of me, but I know how I'd feel. It's interesting to read about what others think.
There's alot of boiling water north of Tokyo at the moment ready for the lobster terminucleardor.
Man has been slaughtering others (including other humans) for a long time. It has always been easy to find/select some "scientific" or "logical" reason to justify the killings.
(It seems) We first decide what we want to do and then find some fact/study/research/opinion/theory/belief that justifies it.
If boiling lobsters alive is cruel...
then is boiling clams alive cruel too? They don't seem to make a fuss.
No living creature should be killed while alive. Can;t you kill them after they die, and then ... i mean can't you boil them after they have passed away and their souls have gone to heaven ?
When I was a kid we just used to let them run around for a bit without their heads on...we thought it was funny.
The really weird thing is that if hold the chicken's head to the floor, and draw a line, it will follow it or remain immobile. You can also so it by tucking their head under their wing and they fall asleep.
Similar to this:
We used to do this the whole time when getting them together for a big meal or similar.
The crazy thing is that if you do this with the line and they start moving along the line walking, you can pick them up, cut off their head and put them down and they will continue in a straight line. We once had ten of them marching in line headless once. Things you do as kids. We were right sick little **** back then
^^ No, that's okay, origmarm. We were not sick, somehow as children we just do not know (I think). It's only later when we see the suffering of others that the possibility of compassion arises. I don't think one can pop out of the womb bursting with compassion .
Some people grow up in such tough conditions, that killing animals cruelly is/may be the only option they have for survival.
When I go to the park, it's the little kids who can really be heartless with the weaker ones. I just know they'll grow up and be fine (most of 'em).
Read an interesting abstract of a paper once showing a very high correlation between childhood animal cruelty, such as frying ants with a magnifying glass, and adult sociopathic behavior. As for what we eat, a very small percentage of humans may kill for trophy purposes (hunting) but the vast majority of humans comprise pretty much the only species that takes some care not to eat our prey while alive, and to kill it in some reasonably humane manner (an important part of the rules of what is kosher concerns killing an animal as quickly and painlessly as possible; animals killed by gun or crossbow, i.e. hunted, are not considered kosher. Shellfish are unkosher for other, fairly arcane, reasons.)
Oh I still eat them no problem and we still slaughter ourselves when at home (farm). I just don't mess with them first anymore. I've not got an issue with slaughtering my own dinner. I feel that people that do aren't being honest with themselves.
Would you shout at their severed heads to see if they blinked?
It is a staple of horror and psycho movies.
Usually also a dominating mother in the picture.
What is soul?
There's no such thing. Or it is an imaginary entity invented (i think) in the West, and now (possibly) adopted or seeped into eastern cultures. I am very clear that Indian culture that i am acquainted with, does not accept such an entity. It only accepts what is discoverable. But that's totally off topic.
Only if they wouldn't walk straight
The concept of "Atman" originated thousands of years ago in India (Eastern philosophy/religion). The "soul" is more of a western concept and came later. I agree Sentinel, but in the East, I would say that "Atman" is the closest equivalent to the concept of the "soul". See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ātman_(Hinduism)
You forgot to quote the entire passage.
Well, when quoting science people treat it as if it was complete knowledge, like if there were nothing else new to discover. The experiment they are confortable with and puts them at ease their mind and calm their moral anxiety is the absoulute truth, because someone else had the same idea before them.
It is specially delicate when moral issues are brought up.
Unasked excuse manifests guilt
Here's what I don't get.
Couldn't you figure out whether the lobster feels pain by putting it in shallow hot water and seeing whether it tries to escape?
Methinks it will try to escape. Which means it is feeling fear or pain or both.
So no. I like lobster, but I rarely eat it and have never boiled a lobster or crab. Too creepy.
As for "science," are these the same scientists who used to tell us that newborns don't feel pain?
I am not sure what you are saying but Atman is the same as Brahman and is not an individual soul or entity. It is the one single life form in all beings.
Yes, there is the illusion of an individual entity (often called jiva), but this is only an illusion which yields to the atman. So we may have the concept/belief of an individual entity but it is not discoverable. Only the atman or brahman is.
Edit: yes, the individual soul is often translated to "ego" and this ego is a phantom which yields or leads to the Brahman when we try to trace it. No one has ever found it, although this illusion is the cause of most suffering, violence, hatred, desire etc.
According to an essay by David Foster Wallace the lobster does try to escape the pot. It bangs on the lid and makes alot of noise until it dies, so most people who boil lobsters leave the room until this part is over. (Which makes me think they have their doubts too, or it wouldn't bother them).
The article Borg Number One posted about if crustaceans feel pain stated this:
So until as recently as '89 even vets put dogs into the same category as lobsters and plants. To anyone who has ever owned a dog, that would make you the judgement of experts. I've heard that thing before about how newborns don't feel pain. When is it that they do feel pain then?
Put a lobster in a fryingpan with a piece of fish to nibble on and the stovetop turned off see if it frantically tries to escape.
Then do the same but with the stovetop on and the water preboiling.
However, I'm not the judge. Merely the executioner.
According to Hinduism, God (one God Brahman) runs through everything, including all human beings. In Hinduism, God is both omnipotent and omnipresent. The concepts of Atman, Brahman, and all of creation (big bang, etc) are interrelated. In Hinduism, Brahman (God, One and Only One) is the core of all things in the cosmos (universe/multiverse). So I understand what you are saying. You are speaking of the concept of duality, when one views the individual as somehow separate from God (Brahman), with an independant existence. In Hindu philosophy and religion, we are all "one with God" and not separate, though we are individuals/living beings. God (Brahman) exists everywhere and runs through everything, so yes in that way, there is the illusion of a separate and distinct "soul". As far as "cycles" for the Atman, well there is the view once a human being reaches a stage of enlightenment, the journey of the "atman" may come to an end. What is this? There is moksha, or salvation, when such an enlightened being attains salvation, or moksha (liberation) of the Atman. As far as "finding" Brahman though, of course that may be impossible in that God may be entirely transendant. So, Brahman is omnipresent and the "thread" that runs through all of creation in this way.
I vote we don't get into religion about this discussion. It is cancerous.
I think it can be cancerous, but it doesn't have to be. Some people do misuse religion, but it can also be a positive influence. I agree that it is often a source of big problems, misused by human beings often. We've had a few religious references in this thread, but the discussion has been good and interesting, as well as respectful. If there can be a discussion about ending life, religion tends to be brought into the discussion. One could also say that many topics are not appropriate, but it largely depends on how discussion is handled. As to the thread, thanks to Steady Eddy for an interesting topic.
^^ agreed about not getting into religion. Ack, sureshs asked about soul, and i know he was mildly "trolling" but i bit the bait. I was supposed to give him a humorous reply but failed.
Why do we care how our food is killed? In nature it seems no other species is considerate of causing pain to its prey. Is it because we are superior and can feel these emotions and thus should endeavour to do what makes us feel better?
The outcome is the same. Personally the idea of screaming lobsters being boiled alive is quite horrific to me, but if a lobster was presented nicely cooked to me I might try a bit of it, just to see what it tastes like.
I am sure if I saw a cow being killed, then its meat cut from its carcass it would be quite off putting. I have infact seen this with goats. But I still eat this meat, and dont have any qualms about it.
In the end it makes no difference to anything, only our attempts to make us feel better.
We are depriving a living creature of its life so that we can consume it. How much we want to distance ourselves from the killing process, or how "humane" this killing process is is only relevant to how it makes us feel, its completely selfish.
The animal is still killed for us and that is nature, its just that we dont kill it ourselves anymore, we have other people to do that in places we dont like to think about, as long as it looks nice in the meat section in the supermarket or nicely cooked on our plates.
Is this a weakness or a sign that we are superior to the mindless carnivores in nature?
I don't know the answer.
It is same thing, man. if you truly find it cruel, make a statement by not eating them. but really, there is no difference between cutting off the tail and eating them or boiling them alive and eating them,,,either way, you are killing them.
emmmmmm,,, that looks good. Is it done yet ?
I'm a meat eater so I'm for killing animals for food, it's part of our nature as human beings.
But there are different ways of killing and some are more cruel than others. I don't see why shouldn't we eat other animals, but I think it's also in our nature to be thoughtful and try to minimize the creature pain when killing it.
The outcome is a killed animal for food and that's fine with me, I like to eat animals, but the procedure does matter. For example, the bulls from bullfighting are eaten once are killed (their meat is excellent it seems) but I'm sure we can think of better ways of killing the bull to eat it.
But many people don't feel the same way about a lobster because at the end it just looks as an alien insect or something.
Interesting point here,....most of us would swat a mosquito without thinking twice (myself incuded),...seems we draw our 'line in the sand' somewhere. I'll eat the food (eg lobster,venison,etc),...but i dont wanna witness the animal die. Especially if its apparently painful, extended, or slow.:neutral:
Also, if you ever saw the cows being killed in the slaughter house,,,,you will probably never eat meat again. but when it is neatly packaged in the local Groceries,,,,it is yummy food. Are we hippocrates or what ?????:???:
what can i say, what possibly can i say ?!!!
It is cruel to boil alive any kind of tennis players be they moonballsters, pushsters, dropshotsters or even lobsters.
but you would eat them if they are neatly packaged in plastic, all cut up into neat portions ??
Reason we boil them alive is that they taste the BEST if they are still alive when they are cooking in hot water. Not sure why but if they are dead, they don't taste as good.
Same for the king crabs as well. and Eels too. Sea or fresh water EELS when cooked alive in tasty boiling sauce is the BEST, very delicious.
Also i saw this Video from China that they just dump in the Live cat skinned and all right in the boiling water. Not sure how they taste though....
poor lobsters, if they were tasting like chicory when cooked, they would have less problems...
The point is they taste better when killed immediately before cooking. It's called fresh whereas most things that come out of the sea aren't. Where is there any evidence they have to be boiled alive to taste better?
Yes, i tried both. and also same with Octopus and Squidds. Calamarie taste best when boiled alive than killed. Just like Live Octopus Legs are more delicious when Live and kicking...
You dipped the Live leg in Hot sauce and put it in your mouth. Nothing tastes better.
^^ time to leave this thread. becoming too disgusting.
OP, are you suggesting that we crush their heads (?skull) first before tossing them in the boiling water?
Separate names with a comma.