What exactly is the minority moral position for which members of a gathering such as this are likely to be propagandists? It will certainly differ sl… - Timothy Sprigge

The restraints we are seeking to impose are ones which can only be opposed by a failure in empathy towards non-human animals which constitutes an irrational blindness to the fact of the basic sameness of suffering in whatever species of animal it occurs; an irrationality incompatible with clear thought about the issue.

If the view outlined here is correct, namely that people cannot really grasp the nature of the suffering which their behaviour creates without wishing to refrain from it, you may ask how do experimenters, factory farmers, cattle transporters, etc., carry on? The answer is, in one way or another, I believe, that they do not really grasp what they are doing. At some level it may be right to say “Forgive them, for they know not what they do”. But the immediate task is to make people realise sufficiently what they, or others on their behalf, are doing, so that it will be done no more.

One cannot really believe that an emotion exists outside one's own consciousness without participating in that emotion and making it to some extent one's own. … Similarly, I can't in any serious sense believe that something I am doing is hurting you without my image of that hurt acting on me as the hurt itself would do if I myself experienced it, encouraging me to desist.