[Shooter 2.5]

"What animals "feel" is not what I would interpret as "suffering" in the human sense."

It's pretty easy to say you're wrong about that. Animals suffer when they get hurt and when they're lonely. I have also noticed a negative reaction when they don't like something. Cats and dogs will shake their heads "no" when they don't want to co-operate.

[sheik yerbouty]

Sometimes they're better judges of people than most people. They can literally smell hostile intent. Especially dogs.

[RobRoy]

I have a dog. I have owned lots of animals. Animals "appear" to suffer as a human does. But appearances are decieving. They can't remember the event five minutes later. They may know that they should not touch the flame, they just can't remember exactly why.

Animals are the biological iquivalent to artificial intelligence. That's why that movie was such a flop. I, at least, couldn't get past the fact that the AI boy was only mimicking actual human emotion. It looked real but it wasn't.

The animals are just running their self preservation program. The things that can damage an animal also cause it what a human would interpret as "pain." That's what helps them to avoid the activity subsequent to the "negative" experience. I don't believe it is quite the same for an animal - the concept of pain, that is - although it gives that appearance. Heck, I can program my computer to yell "OUCH" every time I hit the "x" key. That doesn't mean it feels anything.

Needless to say, I am quite malevelant when it comes to animals. They're a natural resource. Nothing more. One of the things they do offer is the "perception" of companionship, kind of like a teddy bear does for children.