Response to Hooked on a Myth

In Victoria Braithwaite’s article “Hooked on a Myth,” she brings up the age old question on whether or not fish can feel pain. We treat them as a lower class of beings since they can’t exactly show pain; they don’t look sad or cry out in response when pain is evident. However it is shown that fish can feel pain as they have the necessary wiring to detect pain. What does this change, though? Are we going to simply to change the way we fish? Or maybe we could adopt an “utilitarian” society? She brings up a valid point that makes you think about all these questions; but there’s one question that she fails to bring up, does anyone actually care about whether or not fish can feel. As the human race is at the top of the food chain we often feel that all other life forms are below us. The answer that fish can feel has always been out there, it’s just that no one took the time to acknowledge it. We treat fish in a significantly different way than we treat dogs simply because we see them as unintelligent and unfeeling. The line is drawn at a point where if you aren't proven to have a qualitative awareness of feelings then they aren't considered an individual. Braithwaite brings up a point that makes us question our morals, bu tit seems to be that she is making a big deal out of nothing. In a world with an us vs. them mindset this sort of information just isn't relevant enough to make a big change at the moment. She even says herself that we should “adopt an ethical approach and assume that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, fish suffer.” There is not really a solution on what to do with this information at this point in time. Are we going to start offering welfare for slugs and crustaceans? What about the other animals? Where is the line drawn?