Consider the lives of factory farmed animals. There are some disgustingly brutal things that happen to many if not most animals. However, I think it is an open question whether the average factory animal's life is a net positive or negative. Let's assume, however inaccurately, that all 60,000,000,000ish factory animal lives are about neutral. What are the implications for animal welfare intervention strategies?

First, veganism has no direct benefit to animals. By removing demand for animals, you remove the creation of animals, and so the positive and negative aspects of their lives are both removed and cancel out.

Second, all of those horrible things are still happening, so animal farming improvements are still extremely important and trying to get people to care about animals will still help reduce the bad times and increase the good times for animals.

Are there any other interesting implications?

It turns out Robin Hanson has a short essay on this here and Robert Wiblin responds here. Robin assumes net positive and Robert net negative.

However, I think it is an open question whether the average factory animal's life is a net positive or negative.

People who seriously think this is an open question should ask themselves whether they would prefer the average bundle of these experiences for themselves, over a period of unconsciousness. Ultimately it boils down to how many mutilations - without anaesthesia - you would accept for a short life in a cage, followed by painful death.

And then imagine someone forces these experiences on you without having your permission to do so.

Veganism only makes sense if factory-farmed animals have net negative lives, which is a very plausible assumption given their conditions. I'd be interested in information against, though. What makes you think their lives are neutral or positive? Hanson doesn't address this issue and is only persuasive if one things factory-farmed animals have neutral or positive value lives.

Sorry about the title change, I tried to change it right when I posted because it is generic and misleading but the site was screwed up for the next 2 hours.

I lean towards factory farming being net negative but am not sure. I'm somewhat new to this stuff and there are incentives to bias towards showing the bad stuff. Yes, most people who use this argument are probably making excuses.

People who seriously think this is an open question should ask themselves whether they would prefer the average bundle of these experiences for themselves, over a period of unconsciousness. Ultimately it boils down to how many mutilations - without anaesthesia - you would accept for a short life in a cage, followed by painful death.

I agree that this is a decent way to think about it, but notice that you are naming events that make up (afaik) only about a day of an animal's life. They are horrible and may outweigh the years when not being directly tortured, but I'm not yet sure.

Let's assume, however inaccurately, that all 60,000,000,000ish factory animal lives are about neutral. What are the implications for animal welfare intervention strategies?

I'm still interested in this hypothetical question. Remember that just because a life is net positive does not mean the bad parts are now somehow good.

My opinion, which is not shared by everyone, is that the worst part of a farm animal's life is the pain of slaughter. Most land farm animals are broiler chickens, so we should really only focus on them. I would not agree to endure the pain of slaughter for only 45 days of life, even really good life.

The other things you point out are correct. It would still be good to promote memes of animal welfare, but if Logic of the Larder were true, we'd rather focus on welfare improvements than veg*ism. However, wild-animal considerations will dominate the calculation about veg*ism for direct impacts, and memetic effects on values of the future may dominate the calculation overall.

That is correct, but the rest of a farm animal's life isn't hedonically neutral - not even close. It simply isn't an open question.

I completely agree.

For example, in factories for egg-laying, male chickens are killed in the first moments of their life by being thrown into grinders or even suffocated. So, your entire life would consist of a few minutes of fear and confusion going down a conveyor belt, followed by a painful death. How could such an existence possibly be hedonic neutral or positive?

It's close to hedonically neutral, simply because it's too short to feel much discomfort. It's the females I'd be worried about.

DanielLC wrote:It's close to hedonically neutral, simply because it's too short to feel much discomfort. It's the females I'd be worried about.

Even a short time of intense suffering is nowhere near hedonically neutral. And the number of individuals is considerable.

If you showed that their brains aren't yet capable of suffering, or that the actual process contains only very mild discomfort, you would have a point.

It might be enough that it alone is reason to be vegetarian, but it's still not a major cause of suffering. There is only so much you can suffer in a short period of time. Even though dying is much more uncomfortable, living is much, much longer.

I believe so as well. I was using as an example just because I believe it is easier to analyze - and more obvious that such a life is hedonically negative.

Does anyone know where to find footage of factory farms that might be most representative? Animal rights videos of the conditions catch more of the exceptions, I think. Footage of random parts of random factory farms would be ideal.

There's also the fact that it's not always obvious how an animal feels about something. I've been told that chickens are kept in complete darkness for their whole lives like it's a bad thing. I like darkness and think it sounds pretty nice. The real question is what the chickens think.

I believe so as well. I was using as an example just because I believe it is easier to analyze - and more obvious that such a life is hedonically negative.

It's not much evidence that it's hedonically negative overall. If the lives of the rest of the chickens are worth living, it probably outweighs this many times over.

DanielLC wrote:It's not much evidence that it's hedonically negative overall. If the lives of the rest of the chickens are worth living, it probably outweighs this many times over.

Two things: You don't know the rest of their lives are worth living. And if you did, your conclusion still wouldn't follow.

The reason is that intensities really can differ by orders of magnitude. Just ask people who felt the worst types of pains how much money they would demand to feel 10 seconds of them again.

Anecdotal: A friend of mine had painful kidney stones and had to undergo a painful removal procedure while conscious. She described the pain as the worst she'd ever felt. I asked her the 10 seconds question and her answer was half a million euros. She actually endured the pain much longer than 10 seconds.

Given this, it follows a particularly painful death can easily outweigh the utility of several normal life-years even if they are positive.

Two general conclusions if this is accepted:

1) Preventing the worst sufferings can be orders of magnitude more efficient than improving minor stuff.
2) If you want to apply it to the positive side, the potential of high intensity pleasures could be orders of magnitude more efficient than pursuing the ordinary good life.

CosmicPariah wrote:Does anyone know where to find footage of factory farms that might be most representative? Animal rights videos of the conditions catch more of the exceptions, I think. Footage of random parts of random factory farms would be ideal.

My recommendation is to watch the film 'Peaceable Kingdom' for the footage it contains. I understand that the filmmakers at Tribe of Heart strive to show standard practices whereas groups like PETA and Mercy for Animals tend to focus on egregious cruelty in their films and in particular their undercover exposes.

I don't have links handy but I've seen some videos on YouTube from farmers and slaughterhouses seeking to counteract the above. Almost certainly it's slanted in the other direction. Watching footage from both camps may be helpful.