What if?

[Guest tigger]

I'm not about to take this even further off topic and get into a debate about race or PC, and I did try to keep it light (hence the follow-up with the grammatical correction and smiley), I just personally found that to be an insulting (not offensive) comment in the context of this thread, that's all.

 

 

Isn't it funny that for e.g. people can call an Australian an Aussie, a man or woman from Scotland a Scot etc etc yet using the term Chink wich after all is just short for Chinease upsets a non Chinease person ......get real

[great_badir]

It's WAY different from Aussie and Scot - for a start it's Chinese. Not Chinknese.

 

Aussie and Scot just derive from shortening the origin country name, chink however is an ethnic slur with a proper etymological history of its own. It is tantamount to calling a black person "nigger", or someone from around India "paki".

Edited September 29, 2008 by great_badir

[great_badir]

Could part of people's uncertainty/confusion be down to the fact that fish, unlike most other animal cannot/do not voice their "pain" (whatever it is and how they feel it) or animate it in any way that is recognisable to us? One of the worst sounds I know of is an animal (be it human or otherwise) in immense and protracted pain.

 

The fact that fish don't do this could be why so many of us find it difficult to answer the whole question definitively.

 

So back on topic then - any thoughts about this?

[gozzer]

So back on topic then - any thoughts about this?

 

As I've already said, my opinion is based on watching the actions of severely injured fish, immediately after the injury. Whether an animal can voice it's feelings or not, it's actions can still give an indication of any perceived 'pain' or 'suffering'.

 

John.

[corydoras]

So back on topic then - any thoughts about this?

The jury is still out on this one. If you search on Google for 'can fish feel pain' you'll find just about as many sites claiming that they do as you'll find claiming the contrary. Most anglers 'believe' that fish don't feel pain, but then again that's what most of us want to 'believe'. Personally I try to keep my life as free from 'beliefs' as possible. There are things that I accept as being factual, and things that I reject for being false, and I am willing to change my mind providing there is good empirical evidence why I should. The problem with 'beliefs' is that they can become entrenched and some folks can't or won't change their 'beliefs' even when evidence to the contrary is presented to them. Personally I hold with the 'can't feel pain' at the moment, but I am willing to be convinced otherwise, if the evidence is good.

 

I like to keep an open mind, but not so open that my brain will fall out.

[Neil G]

I'd fish on....f**king bill me lol

[Bobj]

"Could part of people's uncertainty/confusion be down to the fact that fish, unlike most other animal cannot/do not voice their "pain" (whatever it is and how they feel it) or animate it in any way that is recognisable to us? One of the worst sounds I know of is an animal (be it human or otherwise) in immense and protracted pain."

 

So, following that, why do we men subject our wives/girlfriends to such terrible pain in childbirth?? Ergot, next time you see a couple of 'greenies' bonking, remind them of the intense pain the female would be subjected to. I wonder if the 'greenies' will ever get on that bandwagon??? :lol:

Sorry to bring a bit of levity to this serious discussion. ;)

[Dick Dastardly]

For the sake of this disscusion forget any scientific research that has been made or any conclussions that practical experience has lead you to.what would you do if fishing was proven to cause "pain","distress","suffering" to fish,would youu still fish ? how would you feel about such a thing?

[great_badir]

So, following that, why do we men subject our wives/girlfriends to such terrible pain in childbirth??

 

..........well............it's always the women who want kids. They know what they're letting themselves in for..................right?...........

 

Good point though!

[great_badir]

Budgie - despite all the good points made on both sides of the fence since, I still think I'd stick with my initial choice of jacking it in completely (trout fishing round these parts is WAY too expensive for me, so I wouldn't take up fishing for the pot). Not having fished for 8 or 9 years anyway, such a statement doesn't really make me feel too bad either way at the moment, but I'm sure once I get back into it I'd be sad to give up. I think I'd just try and focus on the positives of giving it up entirely - save money, petrol, miles, make some extra room in the loft, shed and garage (where all my tackle is spread), have some spare time for all the little house projects I want to do. I guess what I'm trying to say is I would keep myself busy in other ways.