This is meant to be a constructive discussion that has really interested me for some time, and one that I which to have a better understanding of. Please keep that in mind if you are offended or feel the need to defend yourself.
Maybe its because I am a philosophy student and am prone to presenting and debating arguments (its been drilled into me I am afraid), but I wish to gain some insight into and explore the "natural" argument for feeding live. I see it a problematic argument and one that has yet to be presented to me as a strong case. What confuses me the most is that the fact that here we have taken a traditionally wild animal and have placed it in an unnatural condition insofar as we have placed it inside a home, in an enclosure that will NEVER come close to its natural environmental construst, and train them (for lack of a better word) or at least force them on some level or another to interact with us... again an unnatural component and these same people who agree to keep their tegu despite all of these unnatural surroundings use "its natural" as the argument as to why they feed live mice. I would understand this argument better IF there was some necissary health component to it but there is not... feeding dead is just as healthy and arguably natural as tegus are known carrion feeders.
Also, if one is to abide by the "natural" argument, wouldn't one also be obligated under this theory to provide other natural components to their tegu's care rather than pick and choose what they choose to provide (provided that both means of care provide a healthy environment for the tegu).
and so it begins... discuss!
Maybe its because I am a philosophy student and am prone to presenting and debating arguments (its been drilled into me I am afraid), but I wish to gain some insight into and explore the "natural" argument for feeding live. I see it a problematic argument and one that has yet to be presented to me as a strong case. What confuses me the most is that the fact that here we have taken a traditionally wild animal and have placed it in an unnatural condition insofar as we have placed it inside a home, in an enclosure that will NEVER come close to its natural environmental construst, and train them (for lack of a better word) or at least force them on some level or another to interact with us... again an unnatural component and these same people who agree to keep their tegu despite all of these unnatural surroundings use "its natural" as the argument as to why they feed live mice. I would understand this argument better IF there was some necissary health component to it but there is not... feeding dead is just as healthy and arguably natural as tegus are known carrion feeders.
Also, if one is to abide by the "natural" argument, wouldn't one also be obligated under this theory to provide other natural components to their tegu's care rather than pick and choose what they choose to provide (provided that both means of care provide a healthy environment for the tegu).
and so it begins... discuss!