Results for 'vegetarian'

39 found
Order:
See also
Bibliography: Vegetarianism in Applied Ethics
  1. Is a vegetarian diet morally safe?Christopher A. Bobier - forthcoming - Zeitschrift Für Ethik Und Moralphilosophie.
    If non-human animals have high moral status, then we commit a grave moral error by eating them. Eating animals is thus morally risky, while many agree that it is morally permissible to not eat animals. According to some philosophers, then, non-animal ethicists should err on the side of caution and refrain from eating animals. I argue that this precautionary argument assumes a false dichotomy of dietary options: a diet that includes farm-raised animals or a diet that does not include animals (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Was Plato a Vegetarian?Daniel A. Dombrowski - 1984 - Apeiron 18 (1):1-9.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Varför Tännsjö bör bli vegetarian.Simon Rosenqvist - 2014 - Filosofisk Tidskrift 35 (2):33-35.
    Jag argumenterar för att Torbjörn Tännsjö borde anse det fel att äta kött. Därför borde han bli vegetarian. Anledningen till detta är en artikel, "Why we ought to accept the repugnant conclusion", som Tännsjö publicerade 2002 i tidskriften Utilitas.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. 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  
  5. A Defense of the Feminist-Vegetarian Connection.Sheri Lucas - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (1):150-177.
    Kathryn Paxton George's recent publication, Animal, Vegetable, or Woman?, is the culmination of more than a decade's work and encompasses standard and original arguments against the feminist-vegetarian connection. This paper demonstrates that George's key arguments are deeply flawed, antithetical to basic feminist commitments, and beg the question against fundamental aspects of the debate. Those who do not accept the feminist-vegetarian connection should rethink their position or offer a non-question-begging defense of it.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  6. Introducing the Argumentation Framework within Agent-Based Models to Better Simulate Agents’ Cognition in Opinion Dynamics: Application to Vegetarian Diet Diffusion.Patrick Taillandier, Nicolas Salliou & Rallou Thomopoulos - 2021 - Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 24 (2).
    This paper introduces a generic agent-based model simulating the exchange and the diffusion of pro and con arguments. It is applied to the case of the diffusion of vegetarian diets in the context of a potential emergence of a second nutrition transition. To this day, agent-based simulation has been extensively used to study opinion dynamics. However, the vast majority of existing models have been limited to extremely abstract and simplified representations of the diffusion process. These simplifications impairs the realism (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Against Inefficacy Objections: The Real Economic Impact of Individual Consumer Choices on Animal Agriculture.Steven McMullen & Matthew C. Halteman - 2018 - Food Ethics 1 (4):online first.
    When consumers choose to abstain from purchasing meat, they face some uncertainty about whether their decisions will have an impact on the number of animals raised and killed. Consequentialists have argued that this uncertainty should not dissuade consumers from a vegetarian diet because the “expected” impact, or average impact, will be predictable. Recently, however, critics have argued that the expected marginal impact of a consumer change is likely to be much smaller or more radically unpredictable than previously thought. This (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8. Vegetarianism.Mylan Engel - 2016 - Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics.
    Ethical vegetarians maintain that vegetarianism is morally required. The principal reasons offered in support of ethical vegetarianism are: (i) concern for the welfare and well-being of the animals being eaten, (ii) concern for the environment, (iii) concern over global food scarcity and the just distribution of resources, and (iv) concern for future generations. Each of these reasons is explored in turn, starting with a historical look at ethical vegetarianism and the moral status of animals.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9. Should vegans have children? Examining the links between animal ethics and antinatalism.Joona Räsänen - 2023 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 44 (2):141-151.
    Ethical vegans and vegetarians believe that it is seriously immoral to bring into existence animals whose lives would be miserable. In this paper, I will discuss whether such a belief also leads to the conclusion that it is seriously immoral to bring human beings into existence. I will argue that vegans should abstain from having children since they believe that unnecessary suffering should be avoided. After all, humans will suffer in life, and having children is not necessary for a good (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  10. Knocking out pain in livestock: Can technology succeed where morality has stalled?Adam Shriver - 2009 - Neuroethics 2 (3):115-124.
    Though the vegetarian movement sparked by Peter Singer’s book Animal Liberation has achieved some success, there is more animal suffering caused today due to factory farming than there was when the book was originally written. In this paper, I argue that there may be a technological solution to the problem of animal suffering in intensive factory farming operations. In particular, I suggest that recent research indicates that we may be very close to, if not already at, the point where (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  11. Ethical Veganism, Virtue, and Greatness of the Soul.Carlo Alvaro - 2017 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 30 (6):765-781.
    Many moral philosophers have criticized intensive animal farming because it can be harmful to the environment, it causes pain and misery to a large number of animals, and furthermore eating meat and animal-based products can be unhealthful. The issue of industrially farmed animals has become one of the most pressing ethical questions of our time. On the one hand, utilitarians have argued that we should become vegetarians or vegans because the practices of raising animals for food are immoral since they (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  12. 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 thus (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  13. 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  
  14. Consistent Vegetarianism and the Suffering of Wild Animals.Thomas M. Sittler-Adamczewski - 2016 - Journal of Practical Ethics 4 (2):94-102.
    Ethical consequentialist vegetarians believe that farmed animals have lives that are worse than non-existence. In this paper, I sketch out an argument that wild animals have worse lives than farmed animals, and that consistent vegetarians should therefore reduce the number of wild animals as a top priority. I consider objections to the argument, and discuss which courses of action are open to those who accept the argument.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15. To Bite or Not to Bite: Twilight, Immortality, and the Meaning of Life.Brendan Shea - 2009 - In William Irwin, Rebecca Housel & J. Jeremy Wisnewski (eds.), Twilight and Philosophy: Vampires, Vegetarians, and the Pursuit of Immortality. Wiley. pp. 79-93.
    Over the course of the Twilight series, Bella strives to and eventually succeeds in convincing Edward to turn her into a vampire. Her stated reason for this is that it will allow her to be with Edward forever. In this essay, I consider whether this type of immortality is something that would be good for Bella, or indeed for any of us. I begin by suggesting that Bella's own viewpoint is consonant with that of Leo Tolstoy, who contends that one (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16. Buddhism and Animal Ethics.Bronwyn Finnigan - 2017 - Philosophy Compass 12 (7):1-12.
    This article provides a philosophical overview of some of the central Buddhist positions and argument regarding animal welfare. It introduces the Buddha's teaching of ahiṃsā or non-violence and rationally reconstructs five arguments from the context of early Indian Buddhism that aim to justify its extension to animals. These arguments appeal to the capacity and desire not to suffer, the virtue of compassion, as well as Buddhist views on the nature of self, karma, and reincarnation. This article also considers how versions (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  17. 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 meat is disrespectful, either (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  18. Metanormativity: Solving questions about moral and empirical uncertainty.Nicholas Kluge Corrêa & Nythamar Fernandes de Oliveira - 2020 - Ethic@: An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 19 (3):790-810.
    How can someone reconcile the desire to eat meat, and a tendency toward vegetarian ideals? How should we reconcile contradictory moral values? How can we aggregate different moral theories? How individual preferences can be fairly aggregated to represent a will, norm, or social decision? Conflict resolution and preference aggregation are tasks that intrigue philosophers, economists, sociologists, decision theorists, and many other scholars, being a rich interdisciplinary area for research. When trying to solve questions about moral uncertainty a meta understanding (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Consequentialism, Animal Ethics, and the Value of Valuing.Timothy Perrine - 2019 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 37 (3):485-501.
    Peter Singer argues, on consequentialist grounds, that individuals ought to be vegetarian. Many have pressed, in response, a causal impotence objection to Singer’s argument: any individual person’s refraining from purchasing and consuming animal products will not have an important effect on contemporary farming practices. In this paper, I sketch a Singer-inspired consequentialist argument for vegetarianism that avoids this objection. The basic idea is that, for agents who are aware of the origins of their food, continuing to consume animal products (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  20. 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  
  21. The moral footprint of animal products.Krzysztof Saja - 2013 - Agriculture and Human Values 30 (2):193–202.
    Most ethical discussions about diet are focused on the justification of specific kinds of products rather than an individual assessment of the moral footprint of eating products of certain animal species. This way of thinking is represented in the typical division of four dietary attitudes. There are vegans, vegetarians, welfarists and ordinary meat -eaters. However, the common “all or nothing” discussions between meat -eaters, vegans and vegetarians bypass very important factors in assessing dietary habits. I argue that if we want (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  22. The Consequences of Individual Consumption: A Defence of Threshold Arguments for Vegetarianism and Consumer Ethics.Ben Almassi - 2011 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (4):396-411.
    As a moral foundation for vegetarianism and other consumer choices, act consequentialism can be appealing. When we justify our consumer and dietary choices this way, however, we face the problem that our individual actions rarely actually precipitate more just agricultural and economic practices. This threshold or individual impotence problem engaged by consequentialist vegetarians and their critics extends to morally motivated consumer decision-making more generally, anywhere a lag persists between individual moral actions taken and systemic moral progress made. Regan and others (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  23. A Moorean Defense of the Omnivore?Tristram McPherson - 2015 - In Ben Bramble & Bob Fischer (eds.), The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat. New York, US: Oxford University Press. pp. 118-134.
    Philosophers have offered several apparently powerful arguments against the permissibility of eating meat. However, the idea that it is okay to eat meat can seem like a bit of ethical common sense. This paper examines the attempt to adapt one of the most influential philosophical defenses of common sense –G. E. Moore’s case against the skeptic andthe idealist –in support of the omnivore. I first introduce and explain Moore’s argument against the skeptic. I then explain how that argument can be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  24. The Pig’s Squeak: Towards a Renewed Aesthetic Argument for Veganism.A. G. Holdier - 2016 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (4):631-642.
    In 1906, Henry Stephens Salt published a short collection of essays that presented several rhetorically powerful, if formally deficient arguments for the vegetarian position. By interpreting Salt as a moral sentimentalist with ties to Aristotelian virtue ethics, I propose that his aesthetic argument deserves contemporary consideration. First, I connect ethics and aesthetics with the Greek concepts of kalon and kalokagathia that depend equally on beauty and morality before presenting Salt’s assertion: slaughterhouses are disgusting, therefore they should not be promoted. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  25. Act Consequentialism and Inefficacy.Eliot Michaelson - 2016 - In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), Food, Ethics, and Society: An Introductory Text with Readings. Oxford University Press USA. pp. 210-214.
    A variety of eating and purchasing practices, in particular vegetarianism, are often motivated via an appeal to their expected good consequences. Lurking in the background, however, is the question: can I really hope to make a difference via my purchases in a social world as complex and wasteful as our own? I review the evidence as it stands and conclude that there are good reasons to suspect that one probably does not make a difference directly via one's purchases. That said, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  26. 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  
  27. 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 argue that these profiles do (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  28. Default Vegetarianism and Veganism.Timothy Perrine - 2021 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 34 (2):1-19.
    This paper describes a pair of dietary practices I label default vegetarianism and default veganism. The basic idea is that one adopts a default of adhering to vegetarian and vegan diets, with periodic exceptions. While I do not exhaustively defend either of these dietary practices as morally required, I do suggest that they are more promising than other dietary practices that are normally discussed like strict veganism and vegetarianism. For they may do a better job of striking a balance (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. 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  
  30. Kant on Vegetarianism.Hassan Amirehtesham - 2020 - Philpapers.
    Kant’s moral theory aims at highest good, and he believes that good will is the mote unconditioned kind of good in the world. According to Kant, human beings are continually subject to the reason’ demand, and they should try to cultivate their humanity following the universal moral laws. However, he doesn’t leave us with an ambiguity about the definition of these universal laws; proposing his categorical imperative, he leads us to the universal laws. He believes that we would go toward (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. Moral Market Design.Sam Fox Krauss - 2019 - Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy 28 (2).
    We often encounter people who we believe are behaving immorally. We routinely try to change minds and often donate to charitable organizations that do the same. Of course, this does not always work. In a liberal, rights-based society, we have to tolerate this. But legal entitlements to act in ways that others find immoral are inefficiently allocated. For example, some meat-eaters value eating meat less than some vegetarians would be willing to pay them to stop. While many have written about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. Stoicism and Food.William O. Stephens - 2018 - Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics.
    The ancient Stoics believed that virtue is the only true good and as such both necessary and sufficient for happiness. Accordingly, they classified food as among the things that are neither good nor bad but "indifferent." These "indifferents" included health, illness, wealth, poverty, good and bad reputation, life, death, pleasure, and pain. How one deals with having or lacking these things reflects one’s virtue or vice and thus determines one’s happiness or misery. So, while the Stoics held that food in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  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 the contemporary debate regarding (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. The Case for Vegetarianism: Philosophy for a Small Planet. By John L. Hill. [REVIEW]William O. Stephens - 1997 - Environmental Ethics 19 (2):221-224.
    Hill explains that this book “is written both for non-philosophers and for students of philosophy. It is intended to say something both about philosophy, particularly applied moral philosophy, and about the argument for vegetarianism” (p. xiv). Since vegetarianism is an important topic in applied ethics, I had high expectations of this work. However, although the writing is commendably clear, and despite the fact that it is to be welcomed as the first book to bring together and discuss at some length (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. A Moral Argument for Veganism.Daniel Hooley & Nathan Nobis - 2016 - In Andrew Chignell, Terence Cuneo & Matthew C. Halteman (eds.), Philosophy Comes to Dinner: Arguments on the Ethics of Eating. Routledge.
    We offer a relatively simple and straightforward argument that each of us ought to be vegan. We don’t defend this position by appealing to ‘animal rights’ or the view that animals and humans are ‘moral equals’. Rather, we argue that animal agriculture causes serious harms to other animals (such as pain, suffering and death) and these harms are morally unjustified or caused for no good reason. This is true for both ‘factory farming’ and smaller, so-called ‘humane’ farms. We argue that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  36. 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  
  37. Ethics for Fish.Eliot Michaelson & Andrew Reisner - 2017 - In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Food Ethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 189-208.
    In this chapter we discuss some of the central ethical issues specific to eating and harvesting fish. We survey recent research on fish intelligence and cognition and discuss possible considerations that are distinctive to questions about the ethics of eating fish as opposed to terrestrial and avian mammals. We conclude that those features that are distinctive to the harvesting and consumption of fish, including means of capture and the central role that fishing plays in many communities, do not suggest that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  38. 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 foods.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39. Cow Care in Hindu Animal Ethics.Kenneth R. Valpey - 2019 - Springer Verlag.
    This Open Access book provides both a broad perspective and a focused examination of cow care as a subject of widespread ethical concern in India, and increasingly in other parts of the world. In the face of what has persisted as a highly charged political issue over cow protection in India, intellectual space must be made to bring the wealth of Indian traditional ethical discourse to bear on the realities of current human-animal relationships, particularly those of humans with cows. Dharma, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations