Comparing #363 (version 1) and #364 (version 2)

 6 unchanged lines collapsed
And suppose that we have a reasonable (best available) current explanation for why animals are not conscious, I don't think that puts us in a Pascal's wager situation, because considering our own (recognised) fallibility, and the asymmetry of being right and wrong with respect to moral outcomes,outcomes: enormous suffering versus inconvenience, we couldshould consider to tread on the safe side until we have more evidence.
 4 unchanged lines collapsed