People are genuinely ignorant about the care fish need. It's the same thing that happens with all small pets, they're almost disposable. Nobody tells you that they may be cheap to buy but they have needs you can't meet if you're an indifferent owner.
The pet store wouldn't get money from impulse buyers if they told you the care you need for an aquarium (don't you have to start a few weeks before you bring the fish to get the good bacteria?) or how actually big hamster cages are. Or that birds are such sensitive creatures.
Well, even if you just eat plants. There's somewhere where you have to start being indifferent to the lives of other beings, even if that's confined to certain contexts. I mean, yeah, I don't enjoy causing fish pain or discomfort either. I don't even like killing bugs. Compassionate behavior should be encouraged, but by existing we necessarily cause suffering to other beings. In order to not go insane, we have to put up boundaries about what is acceptable or moral - so what are those boundaries and do they have any consistent foundations? capacity for continued suffering is, maybe, somewhere to start looking for consistent foundations.
"Don't cause needless suffering where you can help it" is a pretty solid baseline. People are talking about pets here -- there's a difference between catching and eating a fish vs keeping a fish in a cramped featureless tank where their only escape is an early death, stunted malnourished and miserable. Doing this to fish is not a necessary fact of our existence.
Some animals. There's a term "bambi factor" for how much we empathize with certain species (like, most people empathize more with cats than fish)
deleted by creator
People are genuinely ignorant about the care fish need. It's the same thing that happens with all small pets, they're almost disposable. Nobody tells you that they may be cheap to buy but they have needs you can't meet if you're an indifferent owner.
The pet store wouldn't get money from impulse buyers if they told you the care you need for an aquarium (don't you have to start a few weeks before you bring the fish to get the good bacteria?) or how actually big hamster cages are. Or that birds are such sensitive creatures.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I blame Nirvana
"But it's okay to eat fish
'Cause they don't have any feelings"
deleted by creator
Definitely agree there
Fish don't have a lot of brain.
deleted by creator
How about mosquitos? What about trees?
deleted by creator
What do you eat?
deleted by creator
Well, even if you just eat plants. There's somewhere where you have to start being indifferent to the lives of other beings, even if that's confined to certain contexts. I mean, yeah, I don't enjoy causing fish pain or discomfort either. I don't even like killing bugs. Compassionate behavior should be encouraged, but by existing we necessarily cause suffering to other beings. In order to not go insane, we have to put up boundaries about what is acceptable or moral - so what are those boundaries and do they have any consistent foundations? capacity for continued suffering is, maybe, somewhere to start looking for consistent foundations.
"Don't cause needless suffering where you can help it" is a pretty solid baseline. People are talking about pets here -- there's a difference between catching and eating a fish vs keeping a fish in a cramped featureless tank where their only escape is an early death, stunted malnourished and miserable. Doing this to fish is not a necessary fact of our existence.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Plenty of fish have plenty of brain
deleted by creator
:( That's sad, and I'm sorry, I'm just talking about most people
deleted by creator