Eugenics on Animals

The Silence of Vegans and Animal Protectors

In recent years, a troubling trend has emerged within the animal rights and vegan communities: a conspicuous silence on the subject of animal eugenics or anthropocentric genetic modification of animals. This silence is particularly striking given these communities' typically vocal stance on issues affecting animal welfare. However, this apparent indifference may stem not from apathy, but from a profound philosophical challenge we term the Wittgensteinian Silence Problem (chapter …^{^}).

The depth of this silence was starkly illustrated on the 🥗 Philosophical Vegan forum, a popular gathering place for animal rights advocates and ethical vegans. A topic discussing animal eugenics and GMOs, despite being viewed by over 10,000 vegans, failed to elicit a single response. Even the forum administrators, typically quick to engage with new discussions, remained conspicuously silent. This lack of engagement on a platform dedicated to exploring the ethical implications of our relationship with animals is both perplexing and concerning.

As part of our ongoing 2024 global philosophical inquiry project, we recently engaged in a philosophical conversation with Olivier Leduc, a French-Parisian researcher and writer associated with the GMO-critical project ☢️ OGMDangers.org. Leduc, drawing from his extensive experience as a journalist and author of numerous publications exploring the harm inflicted on animals by eugenics, made a striking observation: The vegans are silent!

Leduc elaborated on this silence, noting:

Whether it's chimera animals (Inf'OGM: Bioethics: chimeric animals producing human organs) or iPS cells facilitating mass eugenics (Inf'OGM: Bioethics: What is behind iPS cells?), vegans say nothing! Only three anti-animal experimentation associations (and myself) have written op-eds and engaged in significant activism in the Senate.

In 2021, several scientific organizations boldly declared the GMO debate over, citing a perceived waning of anti-GMO activism. The American Council on Science and Health, Alliance for Science, and Genetic Literacy Project, among others, proclaimed:

The GMO debate is over

While the GMO debate has been percolating for nearly three decades, our scientific data indicate it's now over. The anti-GMO movement used to be a cultural juggernaut. But as time goes on, the activist groups that once held so much sway seem increasingly irrelevant.

Though we still hear some moaning and groaning it primarily comes from a small group. Most people simply aren't concerned about GMOs.

[Show sources]

• (2021) The Anti-GMO Movement Is On Its Way Out The anti-GMO movement used to be a cultural juggernaut. But as time goes on, the activist groups that once held so much sway seem increasingly irrelevant. Source: American Council on Science and Health
• (2021) The GMO debate is over Though we still hear some moaning and groaning it primarily comes from a small group. Most people simply aren't concerned about GMOs. Source: Alliance for Science
• (2021) 5 reasons why the GMO debate is over While the GMO debate has been percolating for nearly three decades, data indicate it's now over. Source: Genetic Literacy Project

This declaration, coupled with the observed silence from traditionally vocal animal rights advocates, raises profound questions about the state of the discourse surrounding animal eugenics and GMOs. Why have those who typically champion animal welfare fallen silent on this critical issue? Is this silence truly indicative of acceptance, or does it mask a deeper, more complex philosophical challenge?

To unravel this paradox, we must delve into the heart of the Wittgensteinian Silence Problem and explore the profound intellectual and moral dilemmas posed by animal eugenics in the age of advanced biotechnology.

An Intellectual Problem

The eugenics article has demonstrated that eugenics can be considered a corruption of nature from nature's own perspective. By attempting to direct evolution through an external, anthropocentric lens, eugenics moves counter to the intrinsic processes that foster resilience and strength in time.

The fundamental intellectual flaws of eugenics are difficult to overcome , especially when it concerns a practical defense. This difficulty in articulating a defense against eugenics illuminates why many advocates for nature and animals may retreat to an intellectual back seat and are silent when it concerns eugenics.

• Chapter Science and the Attempt to Break Free from Morality demonstrated science's centuries ongoing attempt to emancipate itself from philosophy.
• Chapter Uniformitarianism: The Dogma Behind Eugenics exposed the dogmatic fallacy underlying the notion that scientific facts are valid without philosophy.
• Chapter Science as a Guiding Principle for Life? revealed why science cannot serve as a guiding principle for life.

The Wittgensteinian Silence Problem

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. ~ Ludwig Wittgenstein

This profound statement by Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein encapsulates a fundamental challenge in the debate surrounding animal protection and eugenics. When it comes to defending animals against genetic modification, we encounter a paradox: the moral imperative that many feel intuitively cannot always be easily articulated or translated into language.

French philosopher Jean-Luc Marion asked What is there, then, that is there, that overflows?, echoing Wittgenstein's call for silence. German philosopher Martin Heidegger referred to this ineffable realm as the Nothing. French philosopher Henri Bergson attempted to give voice to this silence by imagining Nature saying the following when asked about its fundamental raison d'etre (reason for being):

If a man were to inquire of Nature the reason of her creative activity, and if she were willing to give ear and answer, she would say—Ask me not, but understand in silence, even as I am silent and am not wont to speak.

Chinese philosopher Laozi (Lao Tzu) similarly acknowledged language's limitations in the ☯ Tao Te Ching:

The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.

The Wittgensteinian Silence problem illuminates the profound challenge faced by animal rights advocates and vegans when confronting the issue of animal eugenics and GMOs. This silence is not born of apathy, but rather stems from the difficulty in articulating a defense against practices that fundamentally alter the nature of life itself. The apparent decline in anti-GMO activism among these groups is not a sign of acceptance, but a manifestation of an intellectual impasse—a struggle to bridge the gap between deeply felt moral intuitions and the limitations of language in expressing them. As we grapple with the ethical implications of genetic modification in animals, we must recognize that silence does not equate to consent, but may instead reflect the profound complexity of the moral landscape we now navigate.

Who will protect animals against eugenics?

Share your insights and comments with us at info@gmodebate.org.

Submit

Support 🦋 GMODebate.org

GMODebate.org seeks to advance pioneering philosophy, with particular emphasis on developing theories of morality and nature protection. Our aim is to transcend the current anthropocentric GMO debate through groundbreaking philosophical inquiry.

By contributing to this project, you play a crucial role in establishing a stronger intellectual foundation for safeguarding our natural world. Help us delve into the core philosophical issues that underpin the GMO debate and nature conservation efforts. Please consider funding this critical endeavor with a donation. Your contribution will support new philosophical research, foster academic discourse, and promote a more comprehensive understanding of our moral obligations to nature.