| GP's point is that we give humans the benefit of the doubt. You have reinforced that notion. >> the degree to which something can experience suffering is proportionate to the sophistication of its ability to think. But we do not assert that human suffering is at all related to IQ or intellectual "sophistication". >> Simple animals appear to be able to experience pain. However ... they don't appear to be able to creatively imagine and dread pain. But we would not say that a human with a mental disorder that renders them unable to think ahead is no longer capable of suffering. >> More sophisticated animals (e.g. dogs) appear to be able to understand suffering in a psychological sense. By "appear to", do you mean that dogs react to suffering in a way that reminds us of other humans? That they have learned to make the right noises, to flinch, to yelp? >> ... while it is clear that virtually every organism avoids death, it is not necessarily clear in which of these or other senses they experience suffering. I suspect that, though you never mention humans here, you are implicitly not questioning whether humans can experience suffering. |
Here's the thing though, high-IQ humans are much more likely to be depressive and so on, so in a sense yes, you can suffer more if you're smarter. Although what you were suggesting was a bit of a straw man, because the gap between a 100 and 150 IQ person is nowhere near as much as the gap between a 100 IQ person and a lizard. That is a massive quantitative difference that's not comparable to the differences between any two humans.
>> Simple animals appear to be able to experience pain. However ... they don't appear to be able to creatively imagine and dread pain. > But we would not say that a human with a mental disorder that renders them unable to think ahead is no longer capable of suffering
Well, I think what he's getting at is that "suffering" seems more like an state of mind than just feeling pain at a given moment, and an important part of it is being upset about past pain and dreading future pain. So he's saying that they suffer less because they don't dread pain, imagine it, torture themselves with the idea of it. As someone who has a problem with working myself into spirals of dread about things, I'll tell you-- that's suffering too.
> > More sophisticated animals (e.g. dogs) appear to be able to understand suffering in a psychological sense. > By "appear to", do you mean that dogs react to suffering in a way that reminds us of other humans? That they have learned to make the right noises, to flinch, to yelp?
Well that wouldn't imply understanding the psychological sense of it, now would it? I think what he means is that dogs can seem to have sympathy for you, when you're hurting, and be concerned about you, etc.
> > ... while it is clear that virtually every organism avoids death, it is not necessarily clear in which of these or other senses they experience suffering. > I suspect that, though you never mention humans here, you are implicitly not questioning whether humans can experience suffering.
Um yeah in his framework he doesn't really have to? I'm not sure I understand your point here?
In summary: please stop straw-manning people just because you don't like their arguments.