Slashdot Mirror


Is an Octopus Too Smart For Us To Eat?

An anonymous reader writes: The New Yorker is running a piece on the ethical dilemma we face when considering octopus intelligence alongside our willingness to eat them. "Octopus intelligence is well documented: they have been known to open jars, guard their unhatched eggs for months or even years, and demonstrate personalities. Most famously, they can blast a cloud of ink to throw off predators, but even more impressive is the masterfully complex camouflage employed by several members of Cephalopoda (a class that also includes squid and cuttlefish)." While humans eat animals ranging widely in mental faculties, the octopus remains one of the smartest ones we do consume. And unlike pigs, for example, their population is not dependent on humanity to survive. As our scientific understanding of intelligence grows, these ethical debates will only come into sharper focus. Where do we draw the line?

40 of 481 comments (clear)

  1. People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is where I draw the line..

    1. Re:People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't be so quick dismissing tasty humans!
      They breed like rabbits and many are about as intelligent as an octopus.

    2. Re:People by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What makes "people" (by which I gather you mean humans) special so that you won't eat them? I see two possibilities. One, that you don't want to pick up the various parasites and diseases that a human can have. Second, that you might think that for whatever reasons it is better on principle to have a living human than a few tens of kilograms of protein.

      The latter is what provides the ethical argument for treating anything that we can consider "near" human as human for various purposes such as whether to eat them. If we're so considerate of ourselves that cannibalism is usually considered a grievous crime, then maybe we should be a bit more considerate of animals that approach us in intellect.

    3. Re:People by ugen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Self-preservation. We are people, hence by social contract we (no longer) eat each other. That way each of us can feel safe that others will not consume him. We consider people who violate that rule criminals or insane and deal with them appropriately.

      There is no such social contract with animals. We can eat them and they, occasionally, eat humans too.

    4. Re:People by RJFerret · · Score: 5, Funny

      Although some aren't capable of opening jars.

    5. Re:People by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      we are not carrion eaters

      Yes we are. There is a lot of evidence that ancient humans ate carrion. Even today, most meat is aged before it is sold, because humans prefer to taste a bit of a carrion tang. Fresh meat doesn't taste as good to us.

      Disclaimer: I am a vegetarian.

    6. Re:People by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sue: "That croc was going to eat me alive."

      Crocodile Dundee: "Well, I wouldn't hold that against him. Same thought crossed my mind once or twice."

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    7. Re: People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ugh. Not only not aged properly, but overcooked. Gross.

      The proper way to order a steak is "scare it with a flashlight", but only after it's been properly dry aged.

    8. Re:People by arth1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Personally, if I saw human meat at the butchers, and it was properly inspected to be free of diseases and medication, I would not have any problem with it.

      i really don't understand taboos. I understand morality, and the need for us not to harm members of our herd, but if a healthy person dies in an accident, that's logically no different than a deer that's been shot.

      But taboos are hard to break. You won't even find horse meat in the US because it's taboo. The reasoning usually boils down to "it's a horse!", and it surely would be "It's a human!" too.

    9. Re:People by JakeBurn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While carrion technically is any decaying meat that is no longer inside of a living animal, its definition is certainly restricted when talking about carrion eaters,(scavengers). Decay is retarded in aged meats by not allowing natural agents in that would start the normal decay process. Otherwise all meat eaters would be classified as carrion eaters as the instant the chemical signals for life stop, the meat becomes carrion. And they don't age most beef to give it any sort of 'carrion tang' they do it to break down the callogenic fibers that hold the meat together and give it a less tough texture. Any noticeable flavor only comes long after the time limits they put on most meats you can buy in the USA. I used to hunt deer and spent extra money to have some of it aged, and unless you dry age for a long time the taste is pretty much the same as straight out of the animal. Only its lack of toughness is noticeable. That's also why you only find high end places, (that charge considerable amounts of money), selling anything with any sort of aged flavor.

    10. Re: People by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Funny

      Slashdot... where anon coward blatant religion-baiting gets +1 Informative

      Damn right, that should have been modded insightful.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  2. Clearly not... by Kenja · · Score: 4, Funny

    We eat them, and if they're so smart why don't they defend themselves?!

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Clearly not... by Artifakt · · Score: 3, Funny

      Would you initaite interspecies contact with a species that wonders whether you go with white wine or red? Would you invade a world where the inhabitants are as likely to reach for a jar of brown sauce as a weapon? Omnivorism - keeping Earth first contact free for over 500,000 years.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  3. Cloud of in ink == advanced intelligence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is that different from a skunk spraying? Or millipedes, or the bombardier beetle?

  4. Its not about intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    its about cuteness.

    Dog & cats = too cute to eat

    cows & chickens = not so much

    rabbits & horses = somewhere in between

    Octopuses arent cute... so its okay to eat them.

    1. Re:Its not about intelligence by aevan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They all get eaten when you're hungry. Necessity is a damned fine seasoning. Would that it were capable to experiment with a thousand PETA supporters, starve them and their families, their children... but offer them roasted dog meat for their hunger. Pretty sure convictions would be put aside for a majority. Cuteness, intelligence, whatever...they are still the 'them' to our 'us' in the end.

    2. Re:Its not about intelligence by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually octopuses are cute, squids not so much, but still.
      You can play with them like with a young cat. And yes, they are smart enough to leave an aquarium, cause random trouble and climb back in.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:Its not about intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Starvation will also drive people to steal, murder, and renege on any oath. As such, a vegetarian's willingness to eat meat when starving is just evidence that the survival instinct will override any moral sensibility, not that deep down inside all vegetarians are really hypocrites.

      So, we should not base laws on what people do when they are starving, but rather on what we think people should do when they are not starving. The fact that a starving person will eat an octopus is no argument for keeping that activity legal.

      The real test of a person's moral backbone is a test of complete freedom...when necessity does not bind one's hand, and consequences are a non-sequitur, then we see what a person is really made of.
       

  5. Where do we put the line? by NReitzel · · Score: 5, Funny

    In front of the sushi bar, of course.

    --

    Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

  6. Vegetarian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a vegetarian I find the whole debate about which animals people should eat and why both amusing and slightly disturbing.

    1. Re: Vegetarian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey guys I found the vegetarian.

    2. Re: Vegetarian by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 4, Funny

      Q:How do you know if someone is a vegetarian?
      A: Don't worry, they'll tell you.

      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
  7. For me? yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They're one of the few species i dont eat on purely ethical grounds. Cats and dogs I wouldn't eat on nutritional grounds, or other higher-order predators for that matter, but I guess that could be argued to be another sort of ethical reasoning.

    A few years ago I saw a YouTube clip of a scuba diver whose camera was literally stolen by the octopus he was filming, who then proceeded to taunt the diver and make him give chase to wrest it back from the cephalopod. Holy shit! I thought, that sea creature is trolling this guy! And with that i decided i would no longer eat them. "Ability to troll" may not be a very scientific (or very high for that matter) bar I guess, but it apparently is mine. YMMV. Damn shame too, as i used to love eating them.

  8. Re:Pigs are dependent on humanity? by denzacar · · Score: 3, Informative

    You mean like buffalo and wild boar?
    I'm guessing somewhere between plenty and a hell of a lot.

    The key word is "dependent". Panda is dependent on humans to survive. Pigs... nope.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  9. Pigs don't really need us... by Biogoly · · Score: 3, Informative

    "And unlike pigs, for example, their population is not dependent on humanity to survive." As the epidemic of destructive feral pigs around the world demonstrates, pigs born in human captivity unfortunately have no problem surviving on their own.

  10. evens out by will_die · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just eat with a marinara sauce and the stupidity of the tomato will even it out.

  11. No eating of species capable of tool use. by He+Who+Has+No+Name · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Simple rule. Never broke it.

    ...Would have liked to put wasabi garnish on the seashells.

    1. Re:No eating of species capable of tool use. by will_die · · Score: 3, Informative
  12. Re:Yes by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Their neural anatomy is also radically different from us vertebrates. That makes comparisons almost meaningless.

    Their brain is a toroid. The esophagus goes through the hole in the middle. Mollusks are weird.

  13. Re:Should lions stop eating us by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Funny

    After all were smart, were hot and where the party of the planet.

    Oh the irony

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  14. Re:Yes by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Actually, they have changed their breeding habits in response to human intervention in the environment. They used to just breed, then die. Now some females live long enough to shepherd their young, passing on information to the next generation. Speculation is that humans have altered their environment sufficiently that this is now an evolutionary advantage, rather than putting all their energy into breeding tons of the next generation, which was the previous optimal survival strategy.

    Lab experiments have shown that they can measure things, and that they can learn by watching another octopus do something ONCE (gee, wish we were as good).

    Does this mean that they're too intelligent to eat? Perhaps the solution is to cross them with chickens - then everyone gets a drumstick.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  15. Re:The rest of the conversation ... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... what about bush meat?

    If it's trimmed nicely, I don't mind.

    Wait, are we talking about the same thing?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  16. Re:Yes by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I recall an article about a aquarium that had a big tank of cuttlefish installed. Then every night one cuttlefish would disappear and no-one could figure out who'd come and steal cuttllefish, so they stuck some night-vision camera in and waited.

    An octopus in a tank across the walkway would pop out the top of its tank, shimmy across the floor, up the side of the cuttlefish tank, grab one, eat it and then retreat back to its tank. I figure anything that figure out that its human keepers had put a fresh source of food for it across the hall is intelligent enough to not be eaten. Incidentally octopi are intelligent enough to take the trapped crabs and lobster from traps.

    but hey, human eat fucking everything, destroying the environment it lives in as we all know nothing is more important than our bellies, and the profits made from selling it for other people's bellies.

  17. Most animals? by tlambert · · Score: 3, Informative

    Social contract? What a load of crap. Most animals do not eat member of their own species. Do you you think it's because they also have a "social contract"?

    I think you have never owned chickens, gerbils, rats, mice, hamsters, and never read about sand tiger sharks, polar bears, spiders, parasitic wasps, or tiger salamanders.

    All of the listed animals eat their young. I guess the ones that get eaten don't have opportunity to sue for "breach of social contract"...

    1. Re:Most animals? by Oligonicella · · Score: 4, Informative

      This subthread is really about eating their own species. Chimps have been observed doing so and it's common knowledge that lions will kill and eat offspring that isn't theirs. Just killed (wah) your first two points.

      But to continue: wolves will, polar bears have been photographed doing so and brown bears will. We've now covered four main groups of large land mammals.

      It is very common in fish, most all carnivorous insects will and has been mentioned, birds will, although it's usually the squab that gets it.

      To quote wikipedia "Cannibalism is a common ecological interaction in the animal kingdom and has been recorded for more than 1500 species." In other words, many species absolutely will kill/eat their own.

  18. Lifeboat Sketch by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    As a naval officer I abhor the implication that the Royal Navy is a haven for cannibalism. It is well known that we have the problem relatively under control, and that it is the R.A.F. who now suffer the largest casualties in this area. And what do you think the Argylls ate in Aden? Arabs?

    Yours etc. Captain B.J. Smethwick in a white wine sauce with shallots, mushrooms and garlic.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  19. I heretofor vow... by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...not to eat any animal that specifically asks me not to.

  20. Re:Yes by brianerst · · Score: 3, Informative

    I wouldn't necessarily rank whales higher (or lower) than octopi. As we've learned from corvids (crows, jays, ravens), absolute brain size and organization isn't a particularly good indicator of intelligence. Crows (who have brains the size of a large peanut) score very similarly to great apes.

  21. Re:Yes by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I totally agree - crows blow my mind. They have complex language, tool use and family units similar to ours.

    My opinion about whales was based upon an experience I had several years ago in Maui. A baby whale and then mother slowly came out of the water 6 feet away from our boat and I looked those whales in the eye. There was obvious curiosity and intelligence there.

    Its hard to imagine eating something like that. It for me borders on cannibalism.

    --
    Greed is the root of all evil.
  22. We empathize with that which is like us by Beeftopia · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We empathize with that which we perceive to be like us. People who look and act like me from my tribe? The halest, heartiest of the bunch, worthy of respect and honor. People who don't look like me but act like me... still, hearty mates. Animals which have emotions like me? Puppies, dogs, cats? Can't hurt them. Chickens? Well... they seem to be pretty different. They're okay to eat. Cows. Wow they're dumb and utterly unlike me - they're okay to kill. Fish? Utterly unlike me. No question, okay to kill. Octopi... wait, you're telling me they're like me? Hmmm, let me consider this.