PZ points us to an interesting article on the ethics of eating cephalopods who, in some cases, are quite intelligent. Sure, there are some absolutely brilliant — perhaps even sapient — cephalopods wandering about in the deep blue sea, but those little calamari we chop up for appetizers aren't them. As PZ suggests, lumping all cephalopods into the same genius genus is akin to lumping humans in with fellow mammals like cows and deciding that we shouldn't eat those walking piles of tasty beef just because Einstein came up with the theory of relativity.

However, this goes a point further, in our view — should intelligence be the deciding factor for whether or not it is culturally or ethically acceptable to eat a particular species? Better yet, should intelligence be the deciding factor for whether or not it's culturally or ethically acceptable to eat a particular organism? Hey, from what we've seen, if we're only crossing "intelligent" lifeforms off the list, that still leaves room for rampant cannibalism in our own species. Cephalopod, ape, dolphin or human, if you are taken in by pathetic bullshit artists like Sylvia Browne or Allison DuBois, or if you believe that people saddled up and rode around on the backs of dinosaurs, or if you blow all your dough on instant lottery tickets, you probably don't deserve much better than a silver platter, a marsala bath, and an apple in your mouth.

Heck, go a step further and conjecture our first encounters with intelligent extraterrestrial life — is it okay to eat somebody (or something) from another planet? They may not even fit into our narrow geocentric view of organic cladistics...so which side of the line do they fall on?

But back to reality, it's an interesting ethical issue; not one that keeps us up nights, and not one that's going to make us stop wolfing down calamari throughout the upcoming holiday season, but interesting. Humans chosen at random will give various justifications for why they do or do not eat specific plants or animals — the taste or smell, the appearance, ethical concerns, an emotional attachment, and so forth — but it comes down to a matter of personal preference and social approval. Drawing any line is as arbitrary as anything else...so should intelligence really be the deciding factor? Food for thought.

We apologize but will not be held liable for any damages resulting from that last pun.

If IQ differential was part of the equation, how smart would you have to be to eat mentally retarded people or children?

we're not supposed to eat retarded people? i had better turn myself in...

Children bring up a different question entirely, more related to the veal debate than the intelligence factor.

If alien life forms have the unfortunate attribute of being deep-fat-fryer-based, intelligence won't save them.

As for me, I avoid eating plants. With all the CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere by humans, we need as many oxygen-generating life forms as we can get. Save the planet! Eat meat!

If intelligence is the only reason we shoulod or should not eat other organisms, we better hope any aliens we encounter aren't smarter than us. Otherwise I'll see you in their labs and kitchens sometime soon.