The least harm principle may require that humans consume a diet containing large herbivores, not a vegan diet

Abstract
Based on his theory of animalrights, Regan concludes that humans are morallyobligated to consume a vegetarian or vegandiet. When it was pointed out to him that evena vegan diet results in the loss of manyanimals of the field, he said that while thatmay be true, we are still obligated to consumea vegetarian/vegan diet because in total itwould cause the least harm to animals (LeastHarm Principle, or LHP) as compared to currentagriculture. But is that conclusion valid? Isit possible that some other agriculturalproduction alternatives may result in leastharm to animals? An examination of thisquestion shows that the LHP may actually bebetter served using food production systemsthat include both plant-based agriculture and aforage-ruminant-based agriculture as comparedto a strict plant-based (vegan) system. Perhapswe are morally obligated to consume a dietcontaining both plants and ruminant(particularly cattle) animal products.
Keywords animal production  animal rights  least harm  moral vegetarianism  vegan
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1025638030686
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 36,609
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Field Deaths in Plant Agriculture.Bob Fischer & Andy Lamey - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (4):409-428.
The Core Argument for Veganism.Stijn Bruers - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (2):271-290.
Moral Caution and the Epistemology of Disagreement.Jonathan Matheson - 2016 - Journal of Social Philosophy 47 (2):120-141.
Food Fight! Davis Versus Regan on the Ethics of Eating Beef.Andy Lamey - 2007 - Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (2):331–348.
Bugging the Strict Vegan.Bob Fischer - 2016 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (2):255-263.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

In Defense of the Vegan Ideal: Rhetoric and Bias in the Nutrition Literature. [REVIEW]Gary E. Varner - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):29-40.
Food Fight! Davis Versus Regan on the Ethics of Eating Beef.Andy Lamey - 2007 - Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (2):331–348.
So Animal a Human ..., Or the Moral Relevance of Being an Omnivore.Kathryn Paxton George - 1990 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 3 (2):172-186.
Discrimination and Bias in the Vegan Ideal.Kathryn Paxton George - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):19-28.
Rejoinder to Kathryn Paxton George.Gary E. Varner - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):83-86.
The Nietzsche Diet and Dr Atkins’s Science.Rebecca Bamford - 2005 - In Lisa Heldke, Kerri Mommer & Cynthia Pineo (eds.), The Atkins Diet and Philosophy. Open Court.
Harm to Others: The Social Cost of Antibiotics in Agriculture.Jonny Anomaly - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (5):423-435.
Who Can Be Morally Obligated to Be a Vegetarian?Evelyn Pluhar - 1992 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):189-215.
Vegan Diets for Women, Infants, and Children.Ann Reed Mangels & Suzanne Havala - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):111-122.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
662 ( #3,555 of 2,304,030 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #23,677 of 2,304,030 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature