explainthatwearenotthreateningtheirlives.Awildanimal
cannotdistinguishanattempttooverpowerandconfinefrom
an attempt to kill; the one causes as much terror as the other.
It may be objected that comparisons of the sufferings of
different species are impossible to make and that for this
reasonwhen theinterests ofanimalsand humansclashthe
principleofequalitygives noguidance. It isprobablytrue
thatcomparisonsofsufferingbetweenmembersofdifferent
species cannot be made precisely, but precision is not
essential. Even if we were to prevent the infliction of
suffering onanimals only when itis quitecertainthat the
interestsofhumanswillnotbeaffectedtoanythinglikethe
extent that animals are affected, we would be forced to make
radical changes in our treatment of animals that would
involveourdiet,thefarmingmethodsweuse,experimental
proceduresinmanyfieldsofscience,ourapproachtowildlife
andtohunting,trappingandthewearingoffurs,andareasof
entertainmentlikecircuses,rodeos,andzoos.Asaresult,a
vast amount of suffering would be avoided.
SofarIhavesaidalotaboutinflictingsufferingonanimals,
but nothing about killing them. This omission has been
deliberate.Theapplicationoftheprincipleofequalitytothe
infliction of suffering is, in theory at least, fairly
straightforward.Painandsufferingareinthemselvesbadand
shouldbe preventedorminimized, irrespectiveoftherace,
sex,orspeciesofthebeingthatsuffers.Howbadapainis
dependsonhowintenseitisandhowlongitlasts,butpains
ofthesameintensityanddurationareequallybad,whether
felt by humans or animals.