this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
77 points (90.5% liked)

Canada

10407 readers
577 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The 32 countries that have formally recognized non-human animal sentience include the European Union, Switzerland, Chile, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 38 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Ever since I looked at the dictionary definition of the word, I have thought animals had sentience. It just means the thing has senses and some awareness of the world around them. Yet it's more commonly used to describe the difference between humans and non-humans, which is what the word "sapience" is supposed to mean. It's like at some point, we started using the wrong word.

[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 5 points 11 months ago

I've always understood sentience as the ability to sense oneself, i.e. a being's capacity at introspection and awareness of one's own existence as a separate experience from other beings.

Many mammals and birds tick this box, some more than others.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Non-human animals may also be sapient. For example, mammals are. There is no meaningful general difference between humans and all other animals.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There is no meaningful general difference between humans and all other animals.

I look forward to you arresting that orca for suspected murder of that shark.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Non sequitur. Or, what is the meaningful general difference that you are trying to describe that applies to every human and no non-human animal?

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You could have "own kill" laws, then you'd have lots of new vegetarians, some small farmers, and some newly discovered psychopaths.

Hear, hear!

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I signed it but I don't really get what's the goal here other than rectifying a minor semantic issue

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It will make it harder to argue in favour of animal abuse in the court of law.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago

I doubt it. But I hope you're right.