- Jul 27, 2010
- 5,121
- 884
- 19,680
Very interesting thread.
1) I simply can’t buy the notion that eating vegan, or whatever you want to call it, is more expensive than eating meat. Vegetables are cheaper than meat anywhere in the world, and particularly in the poorer countries. Even if you don’t do your own cooking at home, there are plenty of places where you can get very cheap vegetarian food—in any large Western city, e.g., Chinese take out places. In fact, though, there are higher quality restaurants of all kinds that serve vegetarian food. I’ve never had a problem anywhere when I’ve been on the road.
2) Abstaining from killing animals for food is not to say that they are our equals. If there is any place where animals may suffer more than in feedlots, it’s in some scientific laboratories. As a scientist, I’ve killed my share of mice and rats (and a few less cuddly species), and I don’t feel really good about it. But when it’s determined that this is the only way to understand and ultimately vanquish serious human diseases, I think this can be justified. It’s justifiable in a way that experimenting on our species—as the Nazis did—never is. But that’s very different from justifying eating animals just because we like the taste of their flesh.
3) It’s true that most animals in the wild lead the Hobbesian life that is nasty, brutish and short. I’m not sure there’s much we can do about that. I don’t see how that justifies raising animals for food. In the first place, most livestock today are raised in very cramped quarters where their lives are arguably much worse than those of animals in the wild. A lot of meat eaters might change their minds—or at least, feel a little more guilt—if they actually saw how these animals are raised, stuffed with hormones, and then butchered. And even if that weren’t the case, even if the animals we raise to kill lead better lives than those in the wild, I don’t see how that is a justification. NOT to compare animals with people, but if one country gasses its Jews, and another imprisons them in better conditions only to kill them when they reach adulthood, is that second country supposed to be admired?
4) There is a lot of scientific evidence for a scale of pain and suffering. Mammals not only feel pain, but they can have some fear of death or at least of impending suffering when it's coming. Arguably, fish don’t feel pain—if I had a hook in my mouth, the last thing I would do is move in a direction that increased the degree to which it pulled at my soft tissue—though this can be debated. They surely don't have the cognitive aspects of fear that mammals have. Very few people would argue that invertebrates like shellfish feel pain. This isn’t intended as a justification for killing and eating some animals and not others, but is certainly something to keep in mind in discussions like this. I don’t think it’s black and white, in the sense that if you eat fish or lobster, you’re no better than someone who eats beef.
5) People may have reasons for not eating eggs or dairy products, but obviously the moral arguments Big Mac (ironic name for someone making these arguments!) is making don’t apply to these in the same way as to eating meat. The animals do have to be domesticated, but if they aren’t killed, and are treated reasonably well, I think this practice can be justified. Big Mac may differ with me here, but I don’t have a problem with animals as property. If we’re going to disallow that, then what do we do with all the dogs, cats and other pets?
1) I simply can’t buy the notion that eating vegan, or whatever you want to call it, is more expensive than eating meat. Vegetables are cheaper than meat anywhere in the world, and particularly in the poorer countries. Even if you don’t do your own cooking at home, there are plenty of places where you can get very cheap vegetarian food—in any large Western city, e.g., Chinese take out places. In fact, though, there are higher quality restaurants of all kinds that serve vegetarian food. I’ve never had a problem anywhere when I’ve been on the road.
2) Abstaining from killing animals for food is not to say that they are our equals. If there is any place where animals may suffer more than in feedlots, it’s in some scientific laboratories. As a scientist, I’ve killed my share of mice and rats (and a few less cuddly species), and I don’t feel really good about it. But when it’s determined that this is the only way to understand and ultimately vanquish serious human diseases, I think this can be justified. It’s justifiable in a way that experimenting on our species—as the Nazis did—never is. But that’s very different from justifying eating animals just because we like the taste of their flesh.
3) It’s true that most animals in the wild lead the Hobbesian life that is nasty, brutish and short. I’m not sure there’s much we can do about that. I don’t see how that justifies raising animals for food. In the first place, most livestock today are raised in very cramped quarters where their lives are arguably much worse than those of animals in the wild. A lot of meat eaters might change their minds—or at least, feel a little more guilt—if they actually saw how these animals are raised, stuffed with hormones, and then butchered. And even if that weren’t the case, even if the animals we raise to kill lead better lives than those in the wild, I don’t see how that is a justification. NOT to compare animals with people, but if one country gasses its Jews, and another imprisons them in better conditions only to kill them when they reach adulthood, is that second country supposed to be admired?
4) There is a lot of scientific evidence for a scale of pain and suffering. Mammals not only feel pain, but they can have some fear of death or at least of impending suffering when it's coming. Arguably, fish don’t feel pain—if I had a hook in my mouth, the last thing I would do is move in a direction that increased the degree to which it pulled at my soft tissue—though this can be debated. They surely don't have the cognitive aspects of fear that mammals have. Very few people would argue that invertebrates like shellfish feel pain. This isn’t intended as a justification for killing and eating some animals and not others, but is certainly something to keep in mind in discussions like this. I don’t think it’s black and white, in the sense that if you eat fish or lobster, you’re no better than someone who eats beef.
5) People may have reasons for not eating eggs or dairy products, but obviously the moral arguments Big Mac (ironic name for someone making these arguments!) is making don’t apply to these in the same way as to eating meat. The animals do have to be domesticated, but if they aren’t killed, and are treated reasonably well, I think this practice can be justified. Big Mac may differ with me here, but I don’t have a problem with animals as property. If we’re going to disallow that, then what do we do with all the dogs, cats and other pets?
I didn't pick the place to eat or buy beforehand with the diet preference on mind, but when at the place I decided to eat something without meat that also pleases my whims, taste-wise. I'll do experiments (for vegetarian, going full-vegan would be a big shock jump at the moment) and compare the expenses, just to be sure.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram