Yes, "not necessarily" is a good way to phrase it. I've seen how wild animals kill their prey and it's definitely not how we kill our livestock. Nature can be an excellent starting point and guide but...
We definitely need not be more cruel than nature, I think we can agree on that.
What Dr. Temple Grandin’s work did was to make animal slaughter less cruel than it was.
But, I think we humans kill animals in a more cruel way than nature does. When in the wild animals are hunted they have a chance to escape and live , we on the other hand leave them no choice like that, which is much worse if you think about cruelty not just in the form of physical violence, its a lifetime of torture and imprisonment, So yeah, sorry but we are much below natures standards and I think, we need to keep striving to rise above it rather than using “Naturalistic Fallacy” argument to justify status quo.
What Dr. Temple Grandin’s work did was to make animal slaughter less cruel than it was.
But, I think we humans kill animals in a more cruel way than nature does. When in the wild animals are hunted they have a chance to escape and live , we on the other hand leave them no choice like that, which is much worse if you think about cruelty not just in the form of physical violence, its a lifetime of torture and imprisonment, So yeah, sorry but we are much below natures standards and I think, we need to keep striving to rise above it rather than using “Naturalistic Fallacy” argument to justify status quo.
1