Results for 'meat'

121 found
Order:
  1. Eating Meat and Not Vaccinating: In Defense of the Analogy.Ben Jones - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (2):135-142.
    The devastating impact of the COVID‐19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic is prompting renewed scrutiny of practices that heighten the risk of infectious disease. One such practice is refusing available vaccines known to be effective at preventing dangerous communicable diseases. For reasons of preventing individual harm, avoiding complicity in collective harm, and fairness, there is a growing consensus among ethicists that individuals have a duty to get vaccinated. I argue that these same grounds establish an analogous duty to avoid buying and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2. Performing 'meat': Meat replacement as drag.Sophia Efstathiou - 2022 - Transforming Food Systems: Ethics, Innovation and Responsibility.
    I propose that meat replacement is to meat, as drag is to gender. Meat replacement has the potential to shake concepts of meat, like drag does for gender. Meat replacements not only mimic meat but disclose how meat itself is performed in carnivorous culture -and show that it may be performed otherwise. My approach is inspired by the show RuPaul’s Drag Race. The argument builds on an imitation of Judith Butler’s work on gender (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. "Meat and Evil".Matthew C. Halteman - 2019 - In Andrew Chignell (ed.), Evil: A History (Oxford Philosophical Concepts). New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 88-96.
    In a world where meat is often a token of comfort, health, hospitality, and abundance, one can be forgiven for raising an eyebrow at the conjunction “meat and evil.” Why pull meat into the orbit of harm, pestilence, ill-will, and privation? From another perspective, the answer is obvious: meat—the flesh of slaughtered animals taken for food—is the remnant of a feeling creature who was recently alive and whose death was premature, violent, and often gratuitous. The truth (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Lab‐Grown Meat and Veganism: A Virtue‐Oriented Perspective.Carlo Alvaro - 2019 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (135):1-15.
    The project of growing meat artificially represents for some the next best thing to humanity. If successful, it could be the solution to several problems, such as feed- ing a growing global population while reducing the environmental impact of raising animals for food and, of course, reducing the amount and degree of animal cruelty and suffering that is involved in animal farming. In this paper, I argue that the issue of the morality of such a project has been framed (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  5. Meat we don't greet: How sausages can save pigs or how effacing livestock makes room for emancipation.Sophia Efstathiou - 2021 - In Arve Hansen & Karen Lykke Syse (eds.), Changing Meat Cultures: Food Practices, Global Capitalism, and the Consumption of Animals. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. pp. 102-112.
    I propose that the intensification of meat production ironically makes meat concepts available to be populated by plants. I argue that what I call “technologies of effacement” facilitate the intensification of animal farming and slaughter by blocking face-to-face encounters between animals and people (Levinas 1969; Efstathiou 2018, 2019). My previous ethnographic work on animal research identifies technologies of effacement as including (a) architectures and the built environment, (b) entry and exit rules, (c) special garments, (d) naming and labeling (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. MEAT MAY NEVER DIE.Carlo Alvaro - 2022 - TRACE 8:156-163.
    The goal of ethical veganism is a vegan world or, at least, a significantly vegan world. However, despite the hard work done by vegan activists, global meat consumption has been increasing (Saiidi 2019; Christen 2021). Vegan advocates have focused on ethics but have ignored the importance of tradition and identity. And the advent of veggie meat alternatives has promoted food that emulates animal products thereby perpetuating the meat paradigm. I suggest that, in order to make significant changes (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Why you shouldn’t serve meat at your next catered event.Zachary Ferguson - 2024 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics.
    Much has been written about the ethics of eating meat. Far less has been said about the ethics of serving meat. In this paper I argue that we often shouldn’t serve meat, even if it is morally permissible for individuals to purchase and eat meat. Historically, the ethical conversation surrounding meat has been limited to individual diets, meat producers, and government actors. I argue that if we stop the conversation there, then the urgent moral (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Manly Meat and Gendered Eating: Correcting Imbalance and Seeking Virtue.Christina Van Dyke - 2016 - In Andrew Chignell, Terence Cuneo & Matthew C. Halteman (eds.), Philosophy Comes to Dinner: Arguments on the Ethics of Eating. Routledge. pp. 39-55.
    The ecofeminist argument for veganism is powerful. Meat consumption is a deeply gendered act that is closely tied to the systematic objectification of women and nonhuman animals. I worry, however, that presenting veganism as "the" moral ideal might reinforce rather than alleviate the disordered status quo in gendered eating, further disadvantaging women in patriarchal power structures. In this chapter, I advocate a feminist account of ethical eating that treats dietary choices as moral choices insofar as they constitute an integral (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9. Fake meat.William O. Stephens - 2018 - Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. Is Meat the New Tobacco? Regulating Food Demand in the Age of Climate Change.Lingxi Chenyang - 2019 - Environmental Law Reporter 49.
    Switching from a meat-heavy to a plant-based diet is one of the highest-impact lifestyle changes for climate mitigation and adaptation. Conventional demand-side energy policy has focused on increasing consumption of efficient machines and fuels. Regulating food demand has key advantages. First, food consumption is biologically constrained, thus switching to more efficient foods avoids unintended consequences of switching to more efficient machines, like higher overall energy consumption. Second, food consumption, like smoking, is primed for norm- shifting because it occurs in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. Save the Meat for Cats: Why It’s Wrong to Eat Roadkill.Cheryl Abbate & C. E. Abbate - 2019 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (1):165-182.
    Because factory-farmed meat production inflicts gratuitous suffering upon animals and wreaks havoc on the environment, there are morally compelling reasons to become vegetarian. Yet industrial plant agriculture causes the death of many field animals, and this leads some to question whether consumers ought to get some of their protein from certain kinds of non factory-farmed meat. Donald Bruckner, for instance, boldly argues that the harm principle implies an obligation to collect and consume roadkill and that strict vegetarianism is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  12. The Immorality of Eating Meat.Mylan Engel - 2000 - Chapter in The Moral Life:856-889.
    Unlike other ethical arguments for veganism, the argument advanced is not predicated on the wrongness of speciesism, nor does it depend on your believing that all animals are equal or that all animals have a right to life, nor is it predicated on some highly contentious metaethical theory which you reject. Rather, it is predicated on your beliefs. Simply put, the argument shows that even those of you who are steadfastly committed to valuing humans over nonhumans are nevertheless committed to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  13. The Ethics of Producing In Vitro Meat.G. Owen Schaefer & Julian Savulescu - 2014 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 31 (2):188-202.
    The prospect of consumable meat produced in a laboratory setting without the need to raise and slaughter animals is both realistic and exciting. Not only could such in vitro meat become popular due to potential cost savings, but it also avoids many of the ethical and environmental problems with traditional meat productions. However, as with any new technology, in vitro meat is likely to face some detractors. We examine in detail three potential objections: 1) in vitro (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  14. The Ethics of Eating Meat.David Sobel - 2017 - Philosophic Exchange 46 (1).
    I explore the ethical issues involved in eating meat.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Emerging profiles for cultured meat; ethics through and as design.C. Weele, van der & C. P. G. Driessen - 2013 - Animals 3 (3):647-662.
    The development of cultured meat has gained urgency through the increasing problems associated with meat, but what it might become is still open in many respects. In existing debates, two main moral profiles can be distinguished. Vegetarians and vegans who embrace cultured meat emphasize how it could contribute to the diminishment of animal suffering and exploitation, while in a more mainstream profile cultured meat helps to keep meat eating sustainable and affordable. In this paper we (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16. Nonculpably Ignorant Meat Eaters & Epistemically Unjust Meat Producers.C. E. Abbate - 2020 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 9 (9):46-54.
    In my recent paper, “The Epistemology of Meat-Eating,” I advanced an epistemological theory that explains why so many people continue to eat animals, even after they encounter anti-factory farming arguments. I began by noting that because meat-eating is seriously immoral, meat-eaters must either (1) believe that eating animals isn’t seriously immoral, or (2) believe that meat eating is seriously immoral (and thus they must be seriously immoral). I argued that standard meat-eaters don’t believe that eating (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Harnessing Moral Psychology to Reduce Meat Consumption.Joshua May & Victor Kumar - 2023 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 9 (2):367-387.
    How can we make moral progress on factory farming? Part of the answer lies in human moral psychology. Meat consumption remains high, despite increased awareness of its negative impact on animal welfare. Weakness of will is part of the explanation: acceptance of the ethical arguments doesn’t always motivate changes in dietary habits. However, we draw on scientific evidence to argue that many consumers aren’t fully convinced that they morally ought to reduce their meat consumption. We then identify two (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  18. Against Flesh: Why We Should Eschew (Not Chew) Lab-Grown and ‘Happy’ Meat.Ben Bramble - 2023 - In Cheryl Abbate & Christopher Bobier (eds.), New Omnivorism and Strict Veganism: Critical Perspectives. Routledge.
    Many people believe that if we could produce meat without animal suffering—say, in ‘humane’ or ‘happy’ farms, or by growing it in a lab from biopsied cells—there would be no moral problem with doing so. This chapter argues otherwise. There is something morally ‘off’ with eating the flesh of sentient beings however it is produced. It is ‘off’ because anyone who truly understands the intimate relationship that an animal’s body stands in to all the value and disvalue in their (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Investigating the elasticity of meat consumption for climate mitigation: 4Rs for responsible meat use.Sophia Efstathiou - 2019 - In Eija Vinnari & Markus Vinnari (eds.), Sustainable Governance and Management of Food Systems: Ethical Perspectives. Brill Wageningen Academic. pp. 19-25.
    Our main research question is how pliable Norwegian meat consumption practices are. However it is not any type of elasticity we are interested in. We are specifically interested in the scope for what we dub the “4Rs” of responsible meat consumption within existing food systems: 1. Reducing the amount of animal-based proteins used 2. Replacing animal-based protein with plant-based, or insect-based alternatives 3. Refining processes of utilization of animal-based protein to minimize emissions, loss and waste 4. Recognising animal-based (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. Do ethics classes influence student behavior? Case study: Teaching the ethics of eating meat.Eric Schwitzgebel, Bradford Cokelet & Peter Singer - 2020 - Cognition 203 (C):104397.
    Do university ethics classes influence students’ real-world moral choices? We aimed to conduct the first controlled study of the effects of ordinary philosophical ethics classes on real-world moral choices, using non-self-report, non-laboratory behavior as the dependent measure. We assigned 1332 students in four large philosophy classes to either an experimental group on the ethics of eating meat or a control group on the ethics of charitable giving. Students in each group read a philosophy article on their assigned topic and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  21. The Case Against Meat.Ben Bramble - 2015 - In Ben Bramble & Bob Fischer (eds.), The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat. New York, US: Oxford University Press.
    There is a simple but powerful argument against the human practice of raising and killing animals for food (RKF for short). It goes like this: 1. RKF is extremely bad for animals. 2. RKF is only trivially good for human beings Therefore, 3. RKF should be stopped. While many consider this argument decisive, not everyone is convinced. There have been four main lines of objection to it. In this paper, I provide new responses to these four objections.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  22. Duty and the Beast: Should We Eat Meat in the Name of Animal Rights?Andy Lamey - 2019 - Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    The moral status of animals is a subject of controversy both within and beyond academic philosophy, especially regarding the question of whether and when it is ethical to eat meat. A commitment to animal rights and related notions of animal protection is often thought to entail a plant-based diet, but recent philosophical work challenges this view by arguing that, even if animals warrant a high degree of moral standing, we are permitted - or even obliged - to eat (...). Andy Lamey provides critical analysis of past and present dialogues surrounding animal rights, discussing topics including plant agriculture, animal cognition, and in vitro meat. He documents the trend toward a new kind of omnivorism that justifies meat-eating within a framework of animal protection, and evaluates for the first time which forms of this new omnivorism can be ethically justified, providing crucial guidance for philosophers as well as researchers in culture and agriculture. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  23.  54
    Recognizing Exploitation and Rejecting Analogy: An Analysis of the Meat-Commodity.Teddy Duncan Jr - 2024 - Between the Species 27 (1):126-149.
    This paper is a two-part project. First, I reject the analogous relationship between the Holocaust and slaughterhouses (found in the anti-meat novel The Lives of Animals) and cross-species analogical thinking entirely; instead, I opt for modes of analysis that can examine the specific circumstances of animals within slaughterhouses. Secondly, I assert that a socio-economic Marxist analysis is the best prism in which to recognize the suffering of pre-slaughter animals and the causation of their suffering (the ostensibly necessary circulation and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. Edibility and In Vitro Meat: Ethical Considerations; By Rachel Robison‐Greene. [REVIEW]Kyle Johannsen - 2024 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 41 (1):170-171.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Feeding Trolls: Against Zangwill's Duty to Eat Meat.Yannic Kappes - manuscript
    Zangwill (“Our Moral Duty to Eat Meat”, “If you care about animals, you should eat them”) has argued that we have a duty to eat meat. In this paper I first show that Zangwill’s essays contain two distinct conclusions: (1) a rather weak thesis that his argument is officially supposed to establish, and (2) a much stronger, advertised thesis that his argument is not officially supposed to establish, but on whose basis he gives concrete recommendations for action and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. (Draft) Cows, crickets and clams: On the alleged 'vegan' obligation to eat different kinds of meat.Benjamin Davies - manuscript
    Vegans do not eat meat. This statement seems so obvious that one might be tempted to claim that it is analytically true. Yet several authors argue that the underlying logic of veganism warrants – perhaps even demands – eating meat. I begin by considering an important principle that has been important in motivating vegan meat-eating, related to an obligation to reduce or minimise harm. I offer an alternative, rights-based view, and suggest that while this might support an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. Edited by S. F. Sapontzis. [REVIEW]William O. Stephens - 2006 - Journal of Philosophy Science and Law 6 (1):1-4.
    Are animals our domestic companions, fellow citizens of the ecosystems we inhabit, mobile meals and resources for us, or some combination thereof? This well chosen collection of essays written by recognized scholars addresses many of the intriguing aspects concerning the controversy over meat consumption. These aspects include not only eating meat, but also hunting animals, breeding, feeding, killing, and shredding them for our use, buying meat, the economics of the meat industry, the understanding of predation and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Corrupting the Youth: Should Parents Feed their Children Meat?Daniel Butt - 2021 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 24 (4):981-997.
    This article is concerned with choices that parents or guardians make about the food they give to their children. Those with primary responsibility for the care of young children determine the set of foods that their children eat and have a significant impact on children’s subsequent dietary choices, both in later childhood and in adulthood. I argue that parents have a morally significant reason not to feed meat to their children, which stems from their fiduciary responsibility for the child’s (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Eight new recommendations for wild meat management research.Minh-Hoang Nguyen - 2022 - SM3D Portal.
    Recently, a group of researchers, led by Daniel J. Ingram (University of Stirling), has conducted a critical review of the literature and experts’ evaluations of the on-the-ground progress to gauge the progress toward 11 recommended research needs and actions in approximately the last two decades. According to the review, most areas of wild meat research and management showed limited progress toward sustainability. The most progressive aspect is understanding the drivers behind hunting and the demand for wild meat.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Is it morally permissible to eat meat?Ana Maria Diez De Fex - manuscript
    Many approaches have been taken regarding this topic, some of them are anthropological or scientific that pursue the understanding of why we eat meat, but from the philosophical lens this question is solved in the field of applied ethics, which is the area that debate about the moral status of animals (nonhuman animals) and where different theorizations that tried to explain the relationship between animals and humans and the examination of the morality of meat consumption take place. Some (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. Flesh Without Blood: The public health argument for synthetic meat.Jonathan Anomaly, Diana Fleischman, Heather Browning & Walter Veit - 2023 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 20 (3).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. To Eat Flesh They Are Willing, Are Their Spirits Weak? Vegetarians Who Return to Meat. By Kristin Aronson. [REVIEW]William O. Stephens - 2002 - Between the Species 13 (2).
    In this interesting book Aronson discusses lapsed vegetarians, which she dubs lapsos. She argues that lapsos struggle with the implications of eating meat, and in so doing their spirits are strengthened. She offers the book not as a polemic, but rather a peace offering to soften the debate over meat eating, trace ambiguity and nuance, and suggest that being a vegetarian should not be so easy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat Edited by Steve F. Sapontzis. [REVIEW]William O. Stephens - 2006 - Journal of Philosophy, Science and Law 6 (1):1-4.
    This well chosen collection of essays written by recognized scholars addresses many of the intriguing aspects concerning the controversy over meat consumption. These aspects include not only eating meat, but also hunting animals, breeding, feeding, killing, and shredding them for our use, buying meat, the economics of the meat industry, the understanding of predation and food webs in ecology, and the significance of animals for issues about nutrition, gender, wealth, and cultural autonomy. Dombrowski rightly notes that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Stoicism and Food Ethics.William O. Stephens - 2022 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 9 (1):105-124.
    The norms of simplicity, convenience, unfussiness, and self-control guide Diogenes the Cynic, Zeno of Citium, Chrysippus, Seneca, Musonius Rufus, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius in approaching food. These norms generate the precept that meat and dainties are luxuries, so Stoics should eschew them. Considerations of justice, environmental harm, anthropogenic global climate change, sustainability, food security, feminism, harm to animals, personal health, and public health lead contemporary Stoics to condemn the meat industrial complex, debunk carnism, and select low input, plant-based (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  35. Consumer Choice and Collective Impact.Julia Nefsky - 2017 - In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Food Ethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 267-286.
    Taken collectively, consumer food choices have a major impact on animal lives, human lives, and the environment. But it is far from clear how to move from facts about the power of collective consumer demand to conclusions about what one ought to do as an individual consumer. In particular, even if a large-scale shift in demand away from a certain product (e.g., factory-farmed meat) would prevent grave harms or injustices, it typically does not seem that it will make a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  36. Tainted Food and the Icarus Complex: Psychoanalysing Consumer Discontent from Oyster Middens to Oryx and Crake.Hub Zwart - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (2):255-275.
    In hyper-modern society, food has become a source of endemic discontent. Many food products are seen as ‘tainted’; literally, figuratively or both. A psychoanalytic approach, I will argue, may help us to come to terms with our alimentary predicaments. What I envision is a ‘depth ethics’ focusing on some of the latent tensions, conflicts and ambiguities at work in the current food debate. First, I will outline some promising leads provided by two prominent psychoanalytic authors, namely Sigmund Freud and Jacques (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  37. Moral Vegetarianism vs. Moral Omnivorism.Seungbae Park - 2017 - Human Affairs 27 (3):289-300.
    It is supererogatory to refrain from eating meat, just as it is supererogatory to refrain from driving cars, living in apartments, and wearing makeup, for the welfare of animals. If all animals are equal, and if nonhuman omnivores, such as bears and baboons, are justified in killing the members of other species, such as gazelles and buffaloes, for food, humans are also justified in killing the members of other species, such as cows, pigs, and chickens, for food. In addition, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. The Problem of Justifying Animal-Friendly Animal Husbandry.Konstantin Deininger - 2022 - Transforming Food Systems: Ethics, Innovation and Responsibility.
    Intense or industrial animal husbandry is morally bad. This consensus in animal ethics led to the emergence of veganism which is recently in decline in favour of ‘conscientious carnivorism’ which advocates eating animal products from animal-friendly animal husbandry in response to the moral problems of industrial farming. Advocates of animal-friendly husbandry justify rearing and killing ‘happy animals’ by highlighting that the animals live pleasant lives and would not have existed if not reared for human consumption. In this paper, I tackle (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Self Deception and Happiness.Talya D. Osseily - manuscript
    The argument in this essay will be divided into two parts: utilitarian and virtue ethics, where each party will agree or disagree with the idea that self-deception leads to happiness, taking climate change and meat production as examples to support their claims.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  40. The Case Against Speciesism and Sexism.Kelsey Gaylord - 2022 - Stance 15:32-43.
    Using the interactionist approach of comparative philosophy, I evaluate the intersecting points made in Animal Liberation by Peter Singer and The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory by Carol Adams. The purpose of this paper is to examine how a combination of the utilitarian and feminist perspectives helps us adopt a new philosophy accounting for all systems of oppression involved in eating animals. I conclude that by removing unnecessary harm to animals and unlearning phrases with an absent (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. Deep Vegetarianism.Michael Allen Fox - 1999 - Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
    Challenging the basic assumptions of a meat-eating society, Deep Vegetarianism is a spirited and compelling defense of a vegetarian lifestyle. Considering all of the major arguments both for and against vegetarianism and the habits of meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans alike, Michael Allen Fox addresses vegetarianism's cultural, historical, and philosophical background; details vegetarianism's impact on one's living and thinking; and relates vegetarianism to classical and recent defenses of the moral status of animals. Demonstrating how a vegetarian diet is related (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  42. Veganism, Animal Welfare, and Causal Impotence.Samuel Kahn - 2020 - Journal of Animal Ethics 10 (2):161-176.
    Proponents of the utilitarian animal welfare argument (AWA) for veganism maintain that it is reasonable to expect that adopting a vegan diet will decrease animal suffering. In this paper I argue otherwise. I maintain that (i) there are plausible scenarios in which refraining from meat-consumption will not decrease animal suffering; (ii) the utilitarian AWA rests on a false dilemma; and (iii) there are no reasonable grounds for the expectation that adopting a vegan diet will decrease animal suffering. The paper (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  43. Ontological Frameworks for Food Utopias.Nicola Piras, Andrea Borghini & Beatrice Serini - 2020 - Rivista di Estetica 1 (75):120-142.
    World food production is facing exorbitant challenges like climate change, use of resources, population growth, and dietary changes. These, in turn, raise major ethical and political questions, such as how to uphold the right to adequate nutrition, or the right to enact a gastronomic culture and to preserve the conditions to do so. Proposals for utopic solutions vary from vertical farming and lab meat to diets filled with the most fanciful insects and seaweeds. Common to all proposals is a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  44. «Comme la chair rôtie à la broche…» : heurs et malheurs d’un célèbre argument de convenance en faveur du mouvement de rotation de la Terre et posant la question de la finalité du monde (XIVe-XIXe siècles).Jean-François Stoffel - 2018 - Revue des Questions Scientifiques 189 (1-2):103-208.
    First recorded in the 14th century, the analogy of spit-roast meat argues that expecting the Sun to rotate around a strictly immobile Earth would be just as ludicrous as trying to move the fire around the roasting meat. On the contrary, it should be the Earth that spins upon itself in order to glean, from all possible angles, all the benefits of the Sun, just as it is the meat’s responsibility to turn on the spit before the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  45. Is there a solution to the moral dilemma between animal consciousness and human survival?Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Quan-Hoang Vuong - manuscript
    On April 19, 2024, the New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness was announced at the “Emerging Science of Animal Consciousness” conference held at New York University. The New York Declaration is an effort to showcase a scientific consensus on the presence of conscious experiences across all vertebrates (including reptiles, amphibians, and fish) and many invertebrates (at least including cephalopods, decapod crustaceans, and insects). Scientifically, the New York Declaration marks a significant advancement for humanity. However, it also brings heightened awareness to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. Veganism as a Virtue: How compassion and fairness show us what is virtuous about veganism.Carlo Alvaro - 2017 - Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture and Society 5 (2):16-26.
    With millions of animals brought into existence and raised for food every year, their negative impact upon the environment and the staggering growth in the number of chronic diseases caused by meat and dairy diets make a global move toward ethical veganism imperative. Typi-cally, utilitarians and deontologists have led this discussion. The purpose of this paper is to pro-pose a virtuous approach to ethical veganism. Virtue ethics can be used to construct a defense of ethical veganism by relying on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  47. Folgt aus dem unwert der tierhaltung ein verbot Des fleischkonsums?Simon Gaus - 2013 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 88 (1):257-267.
    It is natural to assume that it can only be morally permissible for consumers to buy meat products if the breeding and killing of animals for the purpose of meat production is morally acceptable. is assumption presupposes a stable and morally relevant connection between the consumption and the production of meat. While both act-consequentialism and the Kantian idea of generalizability initially appear to support that view, neither of them succeeds in establishing a connection of the required kind.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48. Food fight! Davis versus Regan on the ethics of eating beef.Andy Lamey - 2007 - Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (2):331–348.
    One of the starting assumptions in the debate over the ethical status of animals is that someone who is committed to reducing animal suffering should not eat meat. Steven Davis has recently advanced a novel criticism of this view. He argues that individuals who are committed to reducing animal suffering should not adopt a vegetarian or vegan diet, as Tom Regan an other animal rights advocates claim, but one containing free-range beef. To make his case Davis highlights an overlooked (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  49. Meaning Change.Indrek Reiland - forthcoming - Analytic Philosophy.
    The linguistic meaning of a word in a language is what fully competent speakers of the language have a grasp of merely in virtue of their semantic competence. The meanings of words sometimes change over time. 'Meat' used to mean 'solid food', but now means 'animal flesh eaten as food'. This type of meaning change comes with change of topic, what we’re talking about. Many people interested in conceptual engineering have claimed that there is also meaning change where topic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50. Climate Change and Decision Theory.Andrea S. Asker & H. Orri Stefánsson - 2023 - In Gianfranco Pellegrino & Marcello Di Paola (eds.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Climate Change. Springer.
    Many people are worried about the harmful effects of climate change but nevertheless enjoy some activities that contribute to the emission of greenhouse gas (driving, flying, eating meat, etc.), the main cause of climate change. How should such people make choices between engaging in and refraining from enjoyable greenhouse-gas-emitting activities? In this chapter we look at the answer provided by decision theory. Some scholars think that the right answer is given by interactive decision theory, or game theory; and moreover (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 121