Accepting that it's exactly the same argument for caring about sentience.

It's a factual claim (true or false) that are more able to empathise with more intelligent creatures. It's not a rationalization. We do (I do anyway, and I don't think I'm that weird) empathise more with creatures we can imagine capable of doing things like enjoying a joke or having concerns for the concerns of others. I perceive dolphins, apes and some humans as being in that area of intelligence while pigs are at a lower level, more at the level of concern for other nearby pigs. I could very well be wrong in these perceptions.

The other issue is given we care about the well-being of a creature then is whether it's well being relates to it's intelligence as well as it's sentience. I claim it obviously does providing that the creature is sentient.

I won't deny that is a factor, just not sure how much in the grand scheme. We develop emotional attachments to all sorts of animals based on how close we let them in, and often intelligence isn't even important. See the pet example above.

It's sort of interesting that even though I know I'd feel worse if my best friend's dog, Buddy, whom I've known over 12 years died than if someone were to die I don't know or particularly care for, like MrWookie for example, I'm extremely proud to say that out of principle I would always choose to kill the dog first. So there's a difference between the suffering I would feel if given a choice vs if not. I guess one is based on my instinctual feelings of attachment and the other on learned morals. Brian needs to come in and make something up.

It gets more interesting if instead of the dog dying, it is my 92-year-old Gramma. Sorry Wook and family, I know you have many more years to enjoy and grow together, you may even be slightly smarter than Grammy who can't program her VCR, but you're probably gonna draw the short straw here!

We don't have to stop eating meat but any system where our killing involves burning animals alive and living in terrible conditions because we are too damn cheap is highly immoral. Given that many countries (including western ones) still practice torture I shouldn't be too surprised, but still it sickens me to think about.

I agree, the conversation started as a nitpick and took on a strange importance.

The principle is of interest. It's not just learned morals, although empathy is not some fixed thing. The fact you would suffer more keenly if your dog dies but prefer that to some other discomfort demonstrates how complicated it is. It's not just intensity, there is a qualitative aspect as well.

Yeah, even if sentience plays a role, it's not simple. One can imagine aliens arriving on Earth who are more evolved creatures and very likely more intelligent and sentient than humans. I doubt we'll gladly sacrifice human lives to accommodate them. Maybe if they're cute.

I'm going to make the dangerous assumption that BTM will agree on the empathy issue even if not on some of the details. If aliens arrive then #teamearthlings will do their stuff for many reasons.

The more problematic nit-pick is that if there are two species we care in exactly the same way about then it's not true that the (levels of) sentience of the species is all that matters when it comes to ill-treating them. It's pretty close but so is intelligence as long as they are sentient.

We are unlikely to run out of animals to give us such pleasure no matter how peckish you are for their flesh.

(in case it isn't obvious, I am trying really hard to not turn this into a discussion of evolutionary psychology or descriptive morality)

Rank them top to bottom in order of ability to suffer due to the suffering of others. Who should we dine on (Donner Party style) first?

Social animals, brother. You don't have to be super smart to be one.

We can leave it for another time or forever, it was something of a derail although it's also directly relevant. There's no claim that a less intelligent animal can't suffer more and there remains the point that, for example a more intelligent social animal is capable of suffering in ways a less intelligent one cannot.

I'll carry on munching on pigs until I have reason to believe they are more intelligent, maybe enough to be capable of suffering due to the imagined suffering of another animal that's due to the distress of yet another animal. Humans do this easily, we can feel bad about eating pigs in part because we can imagine a pig suffering when a nearby pig is distressed at being dragged to the abattoir.

Whoa, where can I apply for that job?

Me: What's the pay for this job? $12 an hour?
Hiring Manager: No...
Me: $15 an hour?
Hiring Manager: Wat?
Me: Okay, $20 an hour, but that's all I can afford.

I haven't had time to watch the video yet, but this is something to check out.
http://www.wired.com/2014/12/cwif-craigwatts-perdue/