All of these things have evolutionary advantage on their own, with no need to create or receive qualia.

A robot could be programmed to display them.

It wouldn’t be surprising if technologies, such as in vitro meat, solve most animal rights issues long before vegans have managed to turn mankind to our way of thinking (2).

Regardless, I do hope that eventually we will be able to fundamentally improve our ethics and morality by tinkering with our brains (with the consent of the one being tinkered, of course). For now, human morality still seems to be limited by our tastebuds.

(1) http://www.eatright.org/about/content.aspx?id=8357
(2) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16972761

It really really isn’t, and all sorts of things can done in the name of an animal, fetus or whatever having or not having consciousness….I know this can seem like such an obvious “Well, duh” article….but it’s really not, as much as it should be. For all the progress thus far, it feels like we’re still in our diapers when it comes to things that should otherwise, be considered basic.

Not to sound too cynical, of course…it’s just that, as you say — so many issue and actions stem from a (mis)understanding of what is or isn’t conscious…whatever we evolve into in the future (humans/AIs), it would be nice if such issues were finally resolved and they treat us with the respect and humility that we failed to give other species.

I can give money to people worse then me, even if I have virtually nothing and I need to eat…you can argue that it’s stupid and I need this, but my point is…ethics is not necessarily something that’s always limited by your conditions and what you got — this is why I say that the logic isn’t infallible to you in another post.

It sends a message…you can call it stupid and inpractical to give a damn when you can no longer afford too, but it speaks volumes of your character and puts you above many others — that maybe Morality isn’t always necessarily limited by your means and your ‘ability’ to be Moral and what life throws at you….maybe Morality is above that and is only truly limited by how much you want to care.

And I believe it always pays to care — if anything, the more life throws at you, the more you should strive for it, even in the face of it.

One may say my words are hypocritical and rose-colored…indeed, I can understand that — however, Morality shouldn’t be this fickle thing, a luxery that only can be afforded sometimes and cast aside on others —

it’s a difficult subject no doubt, and rationalizing the past is about all we can do about it, but as we move into the future, we should learn from the past and not live in it….There is something wrong if, no matter how “civilized” we become or how much we claim to be, we ‘regress’ and throw away all notions of supposed moral-advancement whenever it becomes “necessary”.

Our technology shouldn’t be the only thing that advances overtime.

Evolution, the process that produced humanity, possesses only one goal: create gene machines maximally
capable of producing copies of themselves. In retrospect, this is the only way complex structures such as life
could possibly arise in an unintelligent universe. But this goal often comes into conflict with human interests,
causing death, suffering, and short life spans. The past progress of humanity has been a history of shattering
evolutionary constraints.
—MICHAEL ANISSIMOV

Michael nailed it – we are breaking constraint after constraint as we grind ourselves higher and higher; it’s gonna get to the point where we don’t have to rationalize so much suffering in all sorts of ways, but as before…we aren’t there yet, and until we get there, we have no choice really but to continue rationalize so much suffering in one way or another — such as feeding ourselves hope through philosophy and religion

I refuse to call my animals, “pets.” They’re family, and I treat them as such. I never raise my voice around them, or do anything that might frighten them. I treat them as I would small children, and just like kids, they know how to play me like a fiddle :P

I don’t mind, tho.

Firstly, our everyday encounters with various vertebrates gives a strong common-sense indication of appreciable levels of consciousness(self-awareness) in these creatures.

But, secondly, and more importantly, within the context of modern science, particularly biology, it is abundantly clear that,fundamentally, this property is a feature of most if not all organisms.

While the implementations and extent of self-awareness varies greatly, it is essentially a “navigational” feature

For it is necessary for most creatures to be aware of their external environment for navigation to such things as food, shelter, and reproduction.

Even sedentary organisms such as plants necessarily exhibit sensory interaction with their environment for such requirements as root growth direction and optimization of sunlight inputs.

Sensory awareness of the environment, particularly in higher vertebrates, necessarily involves an awareness of self as part of that environment.

Thus, from our understanding of biological evolution by natural selection it becomes quite clear that the provision of a navigational feature that involves some degree of self awareness is required for an organism to interact optimally with its environment.

It is a measure of its fitness for the prevailing environment and subject to selection pressure accordingly.

There is, of course, a great gulf between the level of consciousness exhibited by our species in comparison to any other.
Simply because the level of interaction with the environment required by our particular ecological niche is incomparably higher. As evidenced by the billions of artifacts and systems that have resulted from human activities.
The implications arising from reports of the “declaration” that the consciousness of other animals is “just like ours”, however, is very wrong. The consciousness of each creature is a unique implementation which natural selection has honed to match a particular environmental niche.

Our particular imaginations have developed the ability to blend, morph and reconfigure these elements in many ways. That is our special quality. The imaginations of other animals, even such as cats, dogs, chimps and birds come nowhere near to this. They have their own special capabilities which have evolved to match their particular ecological niche.
The dog, and the salmon have incredible olfactory selectivity and sensitivity respectively. The octopus needs its big brain to be able to perform the extraordinary task of matching its skin colors and textures to the terrain.
But when it comes to sheer imaginatory (sic) power, no creature comes within a bull’s roar of the human.

The extraordinarily high capability for imagination (the ability to form and morph neural models of the environment) that is characteristic of our species even allows introspection – consideration of some of our own thought processes. The trap which led early philosophers and, unfortunately, many of today’s scientists who should know better, to metaphysical and mystical interpretations of this rather straightforward biological phenomenon.

Furthermore there is a good case to be made for the proposition that, before long, it is very much on the books that we will have a new cognitive entity on this planet that will better our own level.

A product of the autonomous evolution of technology within the collective imagination of our species.
This is outlined in “The Goldilocks Effect: What Has Serendipity Ever Done For Us?” , a free download in e-book formats from the “Unusual Perspectives” website

And what has this position to do with Christianity?I’d have to believe in sky magicians and preaching zombies, as witnessed by ancient farmers if had this opinion?

I rest my case.