<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18928"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>From: Micha Berger <A href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</A><BR><BR>On Thu, Jul 15,
2010, kennethgmiller@juno.com wrote:<BR>: Whether they are or are not "aware of
their own mental state" seems<BR>: irrelevant to me. They can and do feel pain,
don't they?<BR><BR>RMB responded:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>>>But they don't feel themselves feeling pain. There is no "I"
as in<BR>"I am in pain". There are chemical and neurological events, yes,
but<BR>not suffering as we think of the concept.<BR><BR>:> You are setting a
threshold based on the notion that there is real<BR>:> suffering going on
that carries a moral burden to avoid. Who said?<BR><BR>: Are you saying that
there's no real suffering going on?<BR><BR>Exactly, because an animal doesn't
have a ruach, and therefore there is<BR>no one to suffer. There is stimulus and
response, with no awareness or<BR>bechirah in between. IOW, I am saying that
Skinner and all the other<BR>Radical Behaviorists were totally off in explaining
the human metzi'us,<BR>but their kind of analysis does yield a complete
description of animals. <<<BR><BR><BR><BR></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>>>>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't believe that's true and I don't believe that Skinner's
"explanations" actually explain any vertebrate behavior, certainly not
mammals'.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I enter into evidence the following two exhibits:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>a. Bilaam's donkey</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>b. The calf who ran away because it didn't want to be shechted and the
tanna said, "You have to go and be shechted because lekach notzarta." (and
then -- if I am not confusing two different stories -- he suffered terribly
himself because of his lack of compassion for his animal, until he told the maid
to be nice and not sweep away his chipmunks or squirrels or kittens or
something)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Now the mitzva of shiluach hakan (and also of not shechting an animal and
its child on the same day) may be there in order to train humans not to have the
midah of achzarius. It is questionable whether birds and animals
suffer emotional distress at seeing their children captured or killed -- beyond
instinct. Once their children are grown -- often in a matter of weeks --
they no longer even recognize their own children. But it is
indisputable that they suffer physical pain, and the notion that they don't
suffer because there is no "I" there is just wrong. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff><BR></FONT><B><FONT color=#0000ff>--Toby
Katz<BR>==========<BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0 color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"></B>--------------------</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT lang=0 color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial><BR><BR></FONT> </BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>