Search results for 'Vegetarianism' (try it on Scholar)

144 found
Sort by:
See also:
Bibliography: Vegetarianism in Applied Ethics
  1. Jan Deckers (2009). Vegetarianism, Sentimental or Ethical? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (6):573-597.score: 24.0
    In this paper, I provide some evidence for the view that a common charge against those who adopt vegetarianism is that they would be sentimental. I argue that this charge is pressed frequently by those who adopt moral absolutism, a position that I reject, before exploring the question if vegetarianism might make sense. I discuss three concerns that might motivate those who adopt vegetarian diets, including a concern with the human health and environmental costs of some alternative diets, (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Evelyn B. Pluhar (1993). On Vegetarianism, Morality, and Science: A Counter Reply. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6 (2):185-213.score: 24.0
    I recently took issue with Kathryn George's contention that vegetarianism cannot be a moral obligation for most human beings, even assuming that Tom Regan's stringent thesis about the equal inherent value of humans and many sentient nonhumans is correct. I argued that both Regan and George are incorrect in claiming that his view would permit moral agents to kill and eat innocent, non-threatening rights holders. An unequal rights view, by contrast, would permit such actions if a moral agent's health (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Evelyn Pluhar (1994). Vegetarianism, Morality, and Science Revisited. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):77-82.score: 24.0
    Professor Kathryn George's Use and Abuse Revisited does not contain an accurate assessment of my On Vegetarianism, Morality, and Science: A Counter Reply. I show that she has misrepresented my moral and empirical argumentation.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David DeGrazia (2009). Moral Vegetarianism From a Very Broad Basis. Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):143-165.score: 21.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. George Nicholson (1801/1999). George Nicholson's on the Primeval Diet of Man (1801): Vegetarianism and Human Conduct Toward Animals. E. Mellen Press.score: 21.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Matthew Calarco (2004). Deconstruction is Not Vegetarianism: Humanism, Subjectivity, and Animal Ethics. Continental Philosophy Review 37 (2):175-201.score: 18.0
    This essay examines Jacques Derrida’s contribution to recent debates in animal philosophy in order to explore the critical promise of his work for contemporary discourses on animal ethics and vegetarianism. The essay is divided into two sections, both of which have as their focus Derrida’s interview with Jean-Luc Nancy entitled “‘Eating Well’, or the Calculation of the Subject.” My task in the initial section is to assess the claim made by Derrida in this interview that Levinas’s work is dogmatically (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Simon Clarke, The Unjustified-Suffering Argument for Vegetarianism.score: 18.0
    A major argument for vegetarianism is that eating animals causes unjustified suffering. While this argument has been articulated by several people, it has received surprisingly little attention. Here I restate it in a way that I believe is most convincing, considering and rejecting the two main justifications for causing suffering in order to eat animals. I compare it to some other prominent arguments for vegetarianism, and discuss a major objection to the argument which focuses on whether the animals (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Cathryn Bailey (2007). We Are What We Eat: Feminist Vegetarianism and the Reproduction of Racial Identity. Hypatia 22 (2):39-59.score: 18.0
    : In this article, Bailey analyzes the relationship between ethical vegetarianism (or the claim that ethical vegetarianism is morally right for all people) and white racism (the claim that white solipsistic and possibly white privileged ethical claims are imperialistically or insensitively universalized over less privileged human lives). This plays out in the dreaded comparison of animals with people of color and Jews as exemplified in the PETA campaign and the need for human identification (or solidarity) with animals in (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Ben Almassi (2011). The Consequences of Individual Consumption: A Defence of Threshold Arguments for Vegetarianism and Consumer Ethics. Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (4):396-411.score: 18.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Jonathan Harrison (2008). The Vagaries of Vegetarianism. Ratio 21 (3):286-299.score: 18.0
    The following was meant to be a 'fun paper', which the author's honesty and natural seriousness of mind prevented from coming off well. Its main theme is that it is not wrong to eat meat provided the animals eaten are painlessly killed or – usually in the case of human animals – already dead. In the course of his remarks the author touches on: the bearing of affluence on vegetarianism; animal rights; child eating; treating animals as ends and with (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Ross Cameron, The Unjustified-Suffering Argument for Vegetarianism.score: 18.0
    A major argument for vegetarianism is that eating animals causes unjustified suffering. While this argument has been articulated by several people, it has received surprisingly little attention. Here I restate it in a way that I believe is most convincing, considering and rejecting the two main justifications for causing suffering in order to eat animals. I compare it to some other prominent arguments for vegetarianism, and discuss a major objection to the argument which focuses on whether the animals (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Andrew Tardiff (1998). A Catholic Case for Vegetarianism. Faith and Philosophy 15 (2):210-222.score: 18.0
    Very few Catholics become vegetarians for moral reasons, and virtually no one would expect them to since vegetarianism seems to go hand in hand with views which are incompatible with the Catholic faith. The purpose of this paper is to show that the Catholic Church accepts principles-widely accepted by others, too-which imply a conditional, though broadly applicable, obligation to avoid killing animals for food. Catholic thinkers have not hitherto applied these principles to vegetarianism, but have long used them (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. William O. Stephens (1994). Five Arguments for Vegetarianism. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 1 (4):25-39.score: 18.0
    Five different arguments for vegetarianism are discussed: the system of meat production deprives poor people of food to provide meat for the wealthy, thus violating the principle of distributive justice; the world livestock industry causes great and manifold ecological destruction; meat-eating cultures and societal oppression of women are intimately linked and so feminism and vegetarianism must both be embraced to transform our patriarchal culture; both utilitarian and rights-based reasoning lead to the conclusion that raising and slaughtering animals is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. David Detmer (2007). Vegetarianism, Traditional Morality, and Moral Conservatism. Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):39-48.score: 18.0
    “Moral vegetarianism,” the doctrine that it is immoral to eat meat, is widely dismissed as eccentric. But I argue that moral vegetarianism is thoroughly conservative—it follows directly from two basic moral principles that nearly everyone already accepts. One is that it is morally wrong to cause unnecessary pain. The other is that if it is wrong in one case to do X, then it will also be wrong to do so in another, unless the two cases differ in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Peter Alward (2000). The Naïve Argument Against Moral Vegetarianism. Environmental Values 9 (1):81 - 89.score: 18.0
    The naïve argument against moral vegetarianism claims that if it is wrong for us to eat meant then it is wrong for lions and tigers to do so as well. I argue that the fact that such carnivores lack higher order mental states and need meat to survive do suffice to undermine the naive argument.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Y. Michael Barilan (2004). The Vision of Vegetarianism and Peace: Rabbi Kook on the Ethical Treatment of Animals. History of the Human Sciences 17 (4):69-101.score: 18.0
    Rabbi HaCohen Kook’s essay on vegetarianism and peace, first published in instalments in 1903–4, and reissued 60 years later, is the only treatise in rabbinic Judaism on the relationship between humans and animals. It is here examined as central to his ethical beliefs. His writings, shaped by his background as rabbi and mystic, illuminate the history of environmental and applied ethics. A century ago, he perceived the main challenge that confronts reform movements: multiculturalism.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. John Zeis (2013). A Rawlsian Pro-Life Argument Against Vegetarianism. International Philosophical Quarterly 53 (1):63-71.score: 18.0
    Animal rights and vegetarianism for ethical reasons are positions gaining in influence in contemporary American culture. Although I think that certain rights for animals are consistent with and even entailed by the Catholic understanding of morality, vegetarianism is not. There is a plausible argument for an omnivorous diet from a Rawlsian original position. It is in direct contradiction to the Rawlsian-influenced ethical vegetarianism espoused by Mark Rowlands. Vegetarianism is not the moral high ground: ethical vegetarianism (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Peter Singer (1980). Utilitarianism and Vegetarianism. Philosophy and Public Affairs 9 (4):325-337.score: 15.0
  19. Tom Regan (1980). Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights. Philosophy and Public Affairs 9 (4):305-324.score: 15.0
  20. Hon-Lam Li (2002). Animal Research, Non-Vegetarianism, and the Moral Status of Animals - Understanding the Impasse of the Animal Rights Problem. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (5):589 – 615.score: 15.0
    I offer some reasons for the theory that, compared with human beings, non-human animals have some but lesser intrinsic value. On the basis of this theory, I first argue that we do not know how to compare an animal's claim to be free from a more serious type of harm (e.g., death), and a human's claim to be free from some lesser type of harm (e.g., non-fatal morbidity). For we need to take account of these parties' intrinsic value, and their (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Gaverick Matheny (2003). Least Harm: A Defense of Vegetarianism From Steven Davis's Omnivorous Proposal. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (5):505-511.score: 15.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Roger Crisp (1988). Utilitarianism and Vegetarianism. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 4 (1):41-49.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Stuart Rachels, Vegetarianism.score: 15.0
    1. Animal Cruelty Industrial farming is appallingly abusive to animals. Pigs. In America, nine-tenths of pregnant sows live in “gestation crates.” These pens are so small that the animals can barely move. When the sows are first crated, they may flail around, in an attempt to get out. But soon they give up. Crated pigs often show signs of depression: they engage meaningless, repetitive behavior, like chewing (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Jeremy R. Garrett (2007). Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Human Health: A Response to the Causal Impotence Objection. Journal of Applied Philosophy 24 (3):223–237.score: 15.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Tom Regan (1975). The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 5 (2):181 - 214.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Dan Egonsson (1997). Kant's Vegetarianism. Journal of Value Inquiry 31 (4):473-483.score: 15.0
  27. Hud Hudson (1993). Collective Responsibility and Moral Vegetarianism. Journal of Social Philosophy 24 (2):89-104.score: 15.0
  28. Nathan Nobis (2008). Reasonable Humans and Animals: An Argument for Vegetarianism. Between the Species 13 (8):4.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Philip E. Devine (1978). The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism. Philosophy 53 (206):481 - 505.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Aaron Champene & Don Merrell (2008). The Causal Impotency Objection to Vegetarianism. Southwest Philosophy Review 24 (1):53-60.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Jeff Jordan (2001). Why Friends Shouldn't Let Friends Be Eaten: An Argument for Vegetarianism. Social Theory and Practice 27 (2):309-322.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. S. F. Sapontzis (1988). Animal Liberation and Vegetarianism. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1 (2):139-153.score: 15.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David Boonin (2002). Animal, Vegetable, or Woman?: A Feminist Critique of Ethical Vegetarianism. Environmental Ethics 24 (4):429-432.score: 15.0
  34. M. Fox (2000). Vegetarianism and Planetary Health. Ethics and the Environment 5 (2):163-174.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. John Richard Harris & Richard Galvin (2012). 'Pass the Cocoamone, Please': Causal Impotence, Opportunistic Vegetarianism and Act-Utilitarianism. Ethics, Policy and Environment 15 (3):368 - 383.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Sara Goering (2001). Michael Allen Fox, Deep Vegetarianism:Deep Vegetarianism. Ethics 111 (3):632-634.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Gaverick Matheny (2002). Expected Utility, Contributory Causation, and Vegetarianism. Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (3):293–297.score: 15.0
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Kathryn Paxton George (2002). Book Review: Kerry S. Walters and Lisa Portmess. Ethical Vegetarianism: From Pythagoras to Peter Singer. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. [REVIEW] Hypatia 17 (1):203-205.score: 15.0
  39. Dale Jamieson (1985). Book Review:The Philosophy of Vegetarianism. Daniel A. Dombrowski. [REVIEW] Ethics 95 (3):748-.score: 15.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. S. M. Easton (1985). Rights, Killing, and Suffering: Moral Vegetarianism and Applied Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 11 (1):51-52.score: 15.0
  41. Andrew Tardiff (1996). Simplifying the Case for Vegetarianism. Social Theory and Practice 22 (3):299-314.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Xinyan Jiang (2005). Why Was Mengzi Not a Vegetarianist? Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32 (1):59–73.score: 15.0
  43. Nathan Nobis (2002). Vegetarianism and Virtue. Social Theory and Practice 28 (1):135-156.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Peter Singer (1994). Feminism and Vegetarianism. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 1 (3):36-38.score: 15.0
    Erin McKenna is correct to question the relative weight that I give to emotions and reason in Animal Liberation. In 1975 when the first edition was published, emotion played a key role in the campaigns of animal societies, and I wished to make an appeal to reason that would have ethical and political impact. I disagree with McKenna’s conclusion that an impartial, objective stance is either impossible or undesirable. I argue that we should not abandon the attempt to reach an (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Lawrence J. Jost (1987). The Philosophy of Vegetarianism. Environmental Ethics 9 (3):273-276.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Erin McKenna (1994). Feminism and Vegetarianism. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 1 (3):28-35.score: 15.0
    Singer’s ethics assume an autonomous, impartial, abstract reasoner. Nonhuman animals, like human animals, have an interest in not suffering; so we all agree on an impartial, rational, consistent minimum standard of treatment that we see must extend to nonhuman animals. While I think this kind of argument works well in the “liberal” context of countries based on social contract reasoning, I am not convinced it goes far enough in achieving the desired attitude shift. We are still encouraged to think in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Russ Shafer-Landau (1994). Vegetarianism, Causation and Ethical Theory. Public Affairs Quarterly 8 (1):85-100.score: 15.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. David Benatar (2001). Why the Naïve Argument Against Moral Vegetarianism Really is Naïve. Environmental Values 10 (1):103 - 112.score: 15.0
    When presented with the claim of the moral vegetarian that it is wrong for us to eat meat, many people respond that because it is not wrong for lions, tigers and other carnivores to kill and eat animals, it cannot be wrong for humans to do so. This response is what Peter Alward has called the naive argument. Peter Alward has defended the naive argument against objections. I argue that his defence fails.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Stephen R. L. Clark (1987). Animal Rights Daniel A. Dombrowski: The Philosophy of Vegetarianism. Pp. Iv+188. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984. $20.00 (Paper, 9.95). [REVIEW] The Classical Review 37 (02):224-225.score: 15.0
  50. Michael Allen Fox (2013). Vegetarianism and Veganism. In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 144