Yours is a very interesting point in the animal welfare debate: that thoroughbreds might want to race, and the real cruelty would be in denying them an opportunity to experience the joy of doing something they are so good at.

I hadn't picked up on the fact that you are a runner. I only saw one sign, searching now. I hope you'll contribute more to the #running tag; it is ironically a slow, sleepy one.

I regret having missed the horse race yesterday and a moment in history; someone mentioned it in the morning but I didn't follow up to figure out how or when to watch. I think we were having sushi downtown at the time of the event, and I recall UFC was showing on the TV.

A few thoughts come to mind on reading your equestrian "born to run" idea.

1. Indeed, thoroughbreds are born to run, because they are the product of selective breeding. This, with forced sterilization, is the technique behind the unsavory eugenics movement. Are the animals themselves better off for having been engineered for racing? Don't they break legs all the time? I'll have to defer to your mother, who certainly knows more than I about ruined horses.

2. You and I are not the products of a series of forced marriages, selected for running skill, but we could still be much better runners if, instead of choosing ourselves when we feel like training, and how we want to eat, we were forced to run on a schedule someone determined ideal, forced to eat food chosen for us, and prevented from having access to things considered likely to impair our performance. I agree with Socrates, but it's another step to say people should be forced to experience the beauty and strength of which their bodies are capable.

I don't know enough about how horses are kept and trained to imagine how nice or unpleasant it is. Perhaps the horses enjoy an excellent life, with dental and hoof care, veterinary attention, and ample food and good grooming. At least in the ideal case. Surely there are abuses as well. But a life "in the wild" would not be idyllic either. In my view, when an animal is brought into the world by choice of a human master, the human owes it more than simply a better life than it would have had in the wild, born by accident. It's hard to say how much better.

3. The money. Despite my ignorance of the horse business, I doubt that it is very different than most other businesses in that decisions affecting horse welfare come down mostly to profit. If a horse were to express a preference to do something other than run fast, what happens?

4. Whipping. A quick search shows that plenty has been said about this. No doubt jockeys would not use the crop if it were not effective, but it's an awkward argument that claims a horse was "born" to be whipped.

5. The horse brain. These discussions always run into the issue of suffering and self-determination. I would not have the slightest concern about thoroughbred scallops (I think Costco sells them). Horses seem beautiful and intelligent creatures to me, capable of expressing preferences and suffering. I probably don't need to make this point to you, you don't seem like the type to respond with "what about plants?"