Abstract
In this article, I propose, defend, and apply a principle for applied ethics.
According to this principle, we should exercise moral caution, at least when we
can. More formally, the principle claims that if you should believe or suspend
judgment that doing an action is a serious moral wrong, while knowing that not
doing that action is not morally wrong, then you should not do that action. After
motivating this principle, I argue that it has significant application in applied
ethics. The application to applied ethics comes by way of the epistemic significance
of disagreement. Though such a principle has perhaps a number of applications
in applied ethics, my focus here is limited to the question of whether it is
morally permissible to eat animals for pleasure.