Camelot

the kingdom of fluff

Biologist, Italian, atheist. Main fandoms: Arthurian legends, Les Miserables, Sherlock Holmes.

| fanfics on AO3 | fanfics tumblr | LJ | My fandoms | My ships | Dreamcasts | Top10: Favourite Stuff | 30 Days of Stuff

Before traveling in my blog you have to know some things about my fundamental arthurian opinions:
Arthurian stuff about me (read)

LIST OF ARTHURIAN BOOKS (342) - updated 13th February

GALAHAD/MORDRED: beginner guide

LES MIS: ENGLISH SUBTITLES for the Italian movies

home ask archive Fuckyeah Arthuriana Fuckyeah Javert & Valjean roleplay arthurian theme

But that’s true, animals have a conscious mind and cognitive thought so they can perceive suffering and emotion, plants don’t have that capacity.

Your point? If I compare plants to animals and animals to plants and I do it because they are both alive and the discussion is about chemical reactions am I objectifying animals? 

Why do people keep thinking as animals as something separate from the rest of the living creatures? I know that animals are more similar to us (NOT ALL of animals, of course). Does this mean that we have the right to consider objects all non-animals living.

posted 9 months ago @ 04:35 pm with 1 note

1. askthe-birds said: I just think the original poster had a very valid point, but the world objectifying was the wrong one to use. Yes suffering all comes down to chemical reactions but plants cannot be considered to suffer because it’s a construct of the conscious mind
2. lucrezianoin posted this