Post

Nattily dressed anarchists on bicycles wrote:

More likely, it whether the animal in question can be reasonably expected to experience pain, anticipate it, and take active measures to avoid it. The ability to anticipate and prepare for future eventualities helps.

Such non-humans share characteristics with humans, sure, but that's not particularly surprising given how evolution works.

Of course some non-human animals share traits with humans, like the ability to walk on two legs or to communicate verbally, but this doesn't mean we should attribute human motivation, characteristics or behaviour to those animals in a way that we don't for animals that do not walk on two legs or do not communicate verbally. My point was that if a non-human animal doesn't look or behave in a way that's familiar (human-like) to us then we value their suffering less by default regardless of the factors you mention.