How should we treat beings that might be sentient? - https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/11/how-should-we-treat-beings-that-might-be-sentient/ " always avoid inflicting gratuitous suffering on sentience candidates; take precautions when making decisions regarding a sentience candidate; and make proportional decisions about the care of sentience candidates that are “informed, democratic and inclusive.”
@glynmoody@mauriciobc Once I saw a biologist-turned-scifi-author argue octopuses are the closest we have to aliens — and we eat them. Perhaps we wouldn't eat them if they had a civilization (tools, buildings etc) but still we wouldn't set an embassy.
@glynmoody I note that the author has redefined "sentience" so that it applies to almost every animal. (Which is probably true for other definitions, too, actually; the word is misused).
This neatly sidesteps the question that sprang into my head: WHY should we treat potentially sentient animals differently? To save embarrassment later? That doesn't seem ethical…
@glynmoody we do that all the time, though. edit: I mean — if we had a good record as a species at not harming *because sentient*, we'd not be whaling on each other, and it might make sense to extend that to potentially sentient others.
But we don't.
And I'd still argue that it would be better if we did the best we can by everything around us, sentient or not.