Results for 'veganism'

82 found
Order:
  1. 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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. A Case for Ethical Veganism.Tristram McPherson - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (6):677-703.
    This paper argues for ethical veganism: the thesis that it is typically wrong to consume animal products. The paper first sets out an intuitive case for this thesis that begins with the intuitive claim that it is wrong to set fire to a cat. I then raise a methodological challenge: this is an intuitive argument for a revisionary conclusion. Even if we grant that we cannot both believe that it is permissible to drink milk, and that it is wrong (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  93
    The Ethical Basis for Veganism.Tristram McPherson - forthcoming - In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Food Ethics. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
    This chapter examines the ethical case that can be mounted for veganism. Because there has been comparatively little discussion in ethics focused directly on veganism, the central aim of this chapter is threefold: to orient readers to (some of) the most important philosophical literature relevant to the topic, to provide a clear explanation of the current state of the ethical case for veganism, and to focus attention on the most important outstanding or underexplored questions in this domain. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Veganism.Alejandra Mancilla - forthcoming - In Paul B. Thompson & David M. Kaplan (eds.), Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics. Springer.
    Narrowly understood, veganism is the practice of excluding all animal products from one’s diet, with the exception of human milk. More broadly, veganism is not only a food ethics, but it encompasses all other areas of life. As defined by the Vegan Society when it became an established charity in the UK in 1979, veganism is best understood as “a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude – as far as is possible and practicable – (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  92
    The Core Argument for Veganism.Stijn Bruers - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (2):271-290.
    This article presents an argument for veganism, using a formal-axiomatic approach: a list of twenty axioms are explicitly stated. These axioms are all necessary conditions to derive the conclusion that veganism is a moral duty. The presented argument is a minimalist or core argument for veganism, because it is as parsimonious as possible, using the weakest conditions, the narrowest definitions, the most reliable empirical facts and the minimal assumptions necessary to reach the conclusion. If someone does not (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6.  14
    An Argument for Veganism.Stijn Bruers - 2016 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 78 (3):525-555.
    This article discusses the assumptions that are necessary to derive the conclusion that veganism - avoiding the use of animal products from conventional agriculture, hunting and fishing - is a moral duty. Using a formal-axiomatic framework, it is shown that twenty assumptions or axioms are sufficient to come to the conclusion. The argument is made as parsimonious as possible, using the weakest conditions, the most restrictive definitions and most reliable empirical facts. The argument assumes an antidiscrimination principle and a (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Domination and Consumption: An Examination of Veganism, Anarchism, and Ecofeminism.Ian Werkheiser - 2013 - Journal of Existential and Phenomenological Theory and Culture 8 (2):135-160.
    Anarchism provides a useful set of theoretical tools for understanding and resisting our culture’s treatment of non-human animals. However, some points of disagreement exist in anarchist discourse, such as the question of veganism. In this paper I will use the debate around veganism as a way of exploring the anarchist discourse on non-human animals, how that discourse can benefit more mainstream work on non-human animals, and how work coming out of mainstream environmental discourse, in particular the ecofeminist work (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  27
    Animals, Freedom, and the Ethics of Veganism.Aaron Simmons - 2016 - In Bernice Bovenkerk & Jozef Keulartz (eds.), Animal Ethics in the Age of Humans: Blurring Boundaries in Human-Animal Relationships. Springer. pp. 265-277.
    While moral arguments for vegetarianism have been explored in great depth, the arguments for veganism seem less clear. Although many animals used for milk and eggs are forced to live miserable lives on factory farms, it’s possible to raise animals as food resources on farms where the animals are treated more humanely and never slaughtered. Under more humane conditions, do we harm animals to use them for food? I argue that, even under humane conditions, using animals for food typically (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. How to Argue for (and Against) Ethical Veganism.Tristram McPherson - 2016 - In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), Food, Ethics, and Society. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  17
    You Can't Buy Your Way Out of Veganism.Bob Fischer - 2016 - Between the Species 19 (1).
    Let’s make three assumptions. First, we shouldn’t support factory farms. Second, if animal-friendly agriculture lives up to its name—that is, if animals live good lives (largely free of pain, able to engage in species-specific behaviors, etc.) and are slaughtered in a way that minimizes suffering—then there is nothing intrinsically wrong with killing them for food. Third, animal-friendly agriculture does, in fact, live up to its name. Given these assumptions, it might seem difficult to criticize individuals who source their animal products (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Veganism and Living Well.Christopher Ciocchetti - 2012 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):405-417.
    I argue that many philosophical arguments for veganism underestimate what is at stake for humans who give up eating animal products. By saying all that’s at stake for humans is taste and characterizing taste in simplistic terms, they underestimate the reasonable resistance that arguments for veganism will meet. Taste, they believe, is trivial. Omnivores, particular those that I label meaningful omnivores, disagree. They believe that eating meat provides a more meaningful meal, though just how this works proves elusive. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  12.  3
    The Politics and the Demographics of Veganism: Notes for a Critical Analysis.Dario Martinelli & Aušra Berkmanienė - forthcoming - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique:1-30.
    The present essay aims to offer some reflections concerning the cultural and political aspects of veganism, on the basis of the available surveys and statistics, plus some more gathered by the authors—with the tools of different methodologies, including the semiotic one. After an introduction to veganism as phenomenon and movement, with general reflections and also a number of specific data, the essay proceeds to focus on the more political aspects, with an emphasis on some of the most intriguing (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  42
    Permissible Use and Interdependence: Against Principled Veganism.Katherine Wayne - 2013 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (2):160-175.
    Are animals not ours to use? According to proponents of veganism such as Gary Francione, any and all use of animals by humans is exploitative and wrong. It is wrong because animals have intrinsic worth and humans' use of animals fails to respect that worth. Contra Francione, I argue that that there are conditions under which it may be morally appropriate to collect, consume, sell, or otherwise use animal products. Francione is mistaken in his belief that assigning intrinsic worth (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14.  3
    Veganism, Normative Change, and Second Nature.Simon Lumsden - 2017 - Environmental Philosophy 14 (2):221-238.
    This paper draws on the account of second nature in Aristotle, Dewey and Hegel to examine the way in which norms become embodied. It discusses the implications of this for both the authority of norms and how they can be changed. Using the example of veganism it argues that changing norms requires more than just good reasons. The appreciation of the role of second nature in culture allows us to: firstly, better conceive the difficulty and resistance of individuals to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  10
    An Anti-Commodification Defense of Veganism.Patrick Clipsham & Katy Fulfer - 2016 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 19 (3):285-300.
    We develop an anti-commodification defense of ethical veganism which holds that common defenses of ethical veganism can benefit from treating the commodification of non-human animals as a serious, distinct moral wrong. Drawing inspiration from Elizabeth Anderson’s account of commodification, we develop an account of commodification that identifies most uses of animals in developed countries as forms of problematic commodification. We then show that this position can make significant contributions to both welfarist defenses of ethical veganism and animal (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  2
    A Case For Ethical Veganism: Intuitive And Methodological Considerations.Tristram Mcpherson - 2013 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (4).
    This paper argues for ethical veganism: the thesis that it is typically wrong to consume animal products. The paper first sets out an intuitive case for this thesis that begins with the intuitive claim that it is wrong to set fire to a cat. I then raise a methodological challenge: this is an intuitive argument for a revisionary conclusion. Even if we grant that we cannot both believe that it is permissible to drink milk, and that it is wrong (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  51
    Veganism Versus Meat-Eating, and the Myth of “Root Capacity”: A Response to Hsiao.László Erdős - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (6):1139-1144.
    The relationship between humans and non-human animals has received considerable attention recently. Animal advocates insist that non-human animals must be included in the moral community. Consequently, eating meat is, at least in most cases, morally bad. In an article entitled “In Defense of Eating Meat”, Hsiao argued that for the membership in the moral community, the “root capacity for rational agency” is necessary. As non-human animals lack this capacity, so the argument runs, they do not belong to the moral community. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  18. A Moral Argument for Veganism.Daniel Hooley & Nathan Nobis - 2016 - In Andrew Chignell, Matthew Halteman & Terence Cuneo (eds.), Philosophy Comes to Dinner: Arguments on the Ethics of Eating.
  19.  2
    The Pitfalls of Qualified Moral Veganism. A Critique of Jan Deckers′ Holistic Health Approach to Animal Ethics.Eze Paez - 2017 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 23 (5):1113-1117.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20. A Case For Veganism.Peter Singer - 2007 - Free Inquiry 27:18-19.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  47
    Veganism.Tzachi Zamir - 2004 - Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (3):367–379.
  22.  49
    The Religion of Ethical Veganism. Johnson - 2015 - Journal of Animal Ethics 5 (1):31-68,.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  1
    Living Food Diet and Veganism.T. Arppe, J. Makela & V. Vaananen - 2011 - Social Science Information 50 (2):275-297.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  22
    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. I (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  33
    Vegetarianism and Veganism.Michael Allen Fox - 2013 - In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  8
    No Animal Food: The Road to Veganism in Britain, 1909-1944.Leah Leneman - 1999 - Society and Animals 7 (3):219-228.
    There were individuals in the vegetarian movement in Britain who believed that to refrain from eating flesh, fowl, and fish while continuing to partake of dairy products and eggs was not going far enough. Between 1909 and 1912, The Vegetarian Society's journal published a vigorous correspondence on this subject. In 1910, a publisher brought out a cookery book entitled, No Animal Food. After World War I, the debate continued within the Vegetarian Society about the acceptability of animal by-products. It centered (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Veganism.Tzachi Zamir - 2004 - Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (3):367-379.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. The Immorality of Eating Meat.Mylan Engel Jr - 2000 - Chapter in The Moral Life:856-889.
    Unlike other ethical arguments for veganism, the argument advanced is not predicated on the wrongness of speciesism, nor does it depend on your believing that all animals are equal or that all animals have a right to life, nor is it predicated on some highly contentious metaethical theory which you reject. Rather, it is predicated on your beliefs. Simply put, the argument shows that even those of you who are steadfastly committed to valuing humans over nonhumans are nevertheless committed (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29. Why I Am a Vegan (and You Should Be One Too).Tristram McPherson - 2015 - In Philosophy Comes to Dinner. Routledge. pp. 73-91.
    This paper argues for what I call modest ethical veganism: the view that it is typically wrong to use or eat products made from or by animals such as cows, pigs, or chickens. The argument has three central parts. First, I argue that a central explanation for the wrongness of causing suffering rests upon what it is like to experience such suffering, and that we have good reasons to think that animals suffer in ways that are relevantly analogous to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  33
    Is Vegetarianism Healthy for Children?Nathan Cofnas - forthcoming - Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition.
    According to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ influential position statement on vegetarianism, meat and seafood can be replaced with milk, soy/legumes, and eggs without any negative effects in children. The United States Department of Agriculture endorses a similar view. The present paper argues that the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics ignores or gives short shrift to direct and indirect evidence that vegetarianism may be associated with serious risks for brain and body development in fetuses and children. Regular supplementation with (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  2
    Is Abolitionism Guilty of Racism? A Reply to Cordeiro-Rodrigues.Bob Fischer - forthcoming - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics:1-12.
    Gary Francione is an abolitionist: he maintains that we ought to abolish the institutions and practices that support the exploitation of animals. He also believes that veganism is the “moral baseline” — that is, he thinks it’s morally required of nearly everyone in the developed world, and many beyond it. Luis Cordeiro-Rodrigues claims that abolitionism is guilty of racism, albeit “racism without racists.” I contend that his arguments for this conclusion aren’t successful.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Editor's Introduction.Christiane Bailey & Chloë Taylor - 2013 - Phaenex. Journal of Existential and Phenomenological Theory and Culture 8 (2):i-xv.
    Christiane Bailey and Chloë Taylor (Editorial Introduction) Sue Donaldson (Stirring the Pot - A short play in six scenes) Ralph Acampora (La diversification de la recherche en éthique animale et en études animales) Eva Giraud (Veganism as Affirmative Biopolitics: Moving Towards a Posthumanist Ethics?) Leonard Lawlor (The Flipside of Violence, or Beyond the Thought of Good Enough) Kelly Struthers Montford (The “Present Referent”: Nonhuman Animal Sacrifice and the Constitution of Dominant Albertan Identity) James Stanescu (Beyond Biopolitics: Animal Studies, Factory (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Nonideal Ethics and Arguments Against Eating Animals.Bob Fischer - forthcoming - Environmental Values.
    Arguments for veganism don’t make many vegans, or even many who think they ought to be vegans, at least when they’re written by philosophers. Others — such as the one by Jonathan Safran Foer — seem to do a bit better. Why? To answer this question, I sketch a theory of ordinary moral argumentation that highlights the importance of meaning-based considerations in arguing that people ought to act in ways that deviate from normal expectations for behaviour. In particular, I (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Dialogues on Ethical Vegetarianism, Part 3.Michael Huemer - manuscript
    A four-part series of dialogues between two philosophy students, M and V. The question: is it wrong to eat meat? M and V review the standard arguments plus a few new ones. Part 3 discusses the idea that creatures have different degrees of consciousness, the sense that certain animal welfare positions "sound crazy", and the role of empathy in moral judgment.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Dialogues on Ethical Vegetarianism, Part 2.Michael Huemer - manuscript
    A four-part series of dialogues between two philosophy students, M and V. The question: is it wrong to eat meat? M and V review the standard arguments plus a few new ones. Part 2 discusses miscellaneous defenses of meat-eating. These include the claim that the consumer is not responsible for wrongs committed by farm workers, that a single individual cannot have any effect on the meat industry, that farm animals are better off living on factory farms than never existing at (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Dialogues on Ethical Vegetarianism, Part 1.Michael Huemer - manuscript
    A four-part series of dialogues between two philosophy students, M and V. The question: is it wrong to eat meat? M and V review the standard arguments plus a few new ones. Part 1 discusses the suffering caused by factory farming, and how one's intelligence affects the badness of suffering.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. On a Failed Defense of Factory Farming.Stephen Puryear, Stijn Bruers & László Erdős - 2017 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 30 (2):311-323.
    Timothy Hsiao attempts to defend industrial animal farming by arguing that it is not inherently cruel. We raise three main objections to his defense. First, his argument rests on a misunderstanding of the nature of cruelty. Second, his conclusion, though technically true, is so weak as to be of virtually no moral significance or interest. Third, his contention that animals lack moral standing, and thus that mistreating them is wrong only insofar as it makes one more disposed to mistreat other (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. Vegetarianism, Sentimental or Ethical?Jan Deckers - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (6):573-597.
    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, a concern (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  39. Utilitarianism and Animal Cruelty: Further Doubts.Davies Ben - 2016 - De Ethica 3 (3):5-19.
    Utilitarianism has an apparent pedigree when it comes to animal welfare. It supports the view that animal welfare matters just as much as human welfare. And many utilitarians support and oppose various practices in line with more mainstream concern over animal welfare, such as that we should not kill animals for food or other uses, and that we ought not to torture animals for fun. This relationship has come under tension from many directions. The aim of this article is to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  36
    A Carnivorous Rejoinder to Bruers and Erdös.Timothy Hsiao - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (6):1127-1138.
    In an earlier paper, I defended the moral permissibility of eating meat against sentience-based arguments for moral vegetarianism. The crux of my argument was that sentience is not an intrinsically morally salient property, and that animals lack moral status because they lack a root capacity for rational agency. Accordingly, it is morally permissible to consume meat even if doing so is not strictly necessary for our nutrition. This paper responds to critiques of my argument by Bruers :705–717, 2015) and Erdös. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  41.  69
    "We Are All Noah: Tom Regan's Olive Branch to Religious Animal Ethics".Matthew C. Halteman - 2017 - Between the Species (Special issue in honor of Tom Re).
    For the past thirty years, the late Tom Regan bucked the trend among secular animal rights philosophers and spoke patiently and persistently to the best angels of religious ethics in a stream of publications that enjoins religious scholars, clergy, and lay people alike to rediscover the resources within their traditions for articulating and living out an animal ethics that is more consistent with their professed values of love, mercy, and justice. My aim in this article is to showcase some of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  58
    In Defence of the Vegan Project.Jan Deckers - 2013 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10 (2):187-195.
    The vegan project is defined as the project that strives for radical legal reform to pass laws that would reserve the consumption of animal products to a very narrow range of situations, resulting in vegan diets being the default diets for the majority of human beings. Two objections that have been raised against such a project are described. The first is that such a project would jeopardise the nutritional adequacy of human diets. The second is that it would alienate human (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  43. 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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  44.  52
    Bugging the Strict Vegan.Bob Fischer - 2016 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (2):255-263.
    Entomophagy—eating insects—is getting a lot of attention these days. However, strict vegans are often uncomfortable with entomophagy based on some version of the precautionary principle: if you aren’t sure that a being isn’t sentient, then you should treat it as though it is. But not only do precautionary principle-based arguments against entomophagy fail, they seem to support the opposite conclusion: strict vegans ought to eat bugs.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  45. Minimalizacja Cierpienia Zwierząt a Wegetarianizm.Krzysztof Saja - 2013 - Analiza I Egzystencja 22:67-83.
    The article is a reductio ad absurdum of assumptions which are shared by a large number of followers of the animal welfare movement and utilitarianism. I argue that even if we accept the main ethical arguments for a negative moral assessment of eating meat we should not promote vegetarianism but rather beefism (eating only meat from beef cattle). I also argue that some forms of vegetarianism, i.e. ichtivegetarianism, can be much more morally worse than normal meat diet. In order to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. "Philosophy as Therapy for Recovering (Unrestrained) Omnivores".Matthew C. Halteman & Megan Halteman Zwart - 2016 - In Andrew Chignell, Terence Cuneo, and Matthew C. Halteman, eds., Philosophy Comes to Dinner: Arguments about the Ethics of Eating, New York: Routledge, 2016.
    Recourse to a variety of well-constructed arguments is undoubtedly a significant strategic asset for cultivating more ethical eating habits and convincing others to follow suit. Nevertheless, common obstacles often prevent even the best arguments from getting traction in our lives. For one thing, many of us enter the discussion hampered by firmly-entrenched but largely uninvestigated assumptions about food that make it difficult to imagine how even well-supported arguments that challenge our familiar frames of culinary reference could actually apply to us. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47. On Vegetarianism, Morality, and Science: A Counter Reply. [REVIEW]Evelyn B. Pluhar - 1993 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6 (2):185-213.
    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 or (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  48. Living Toward the Peaceable Kingdom: Compassionate Eating as Care of Creation.Matthew C. Halteman - 2008, 2010 - Humane Society of the United States Faith Outreach.
    As evidence of the unintended consequences of industrial farm animal production continues to mount, it is becoming increasingly clear that, far from being a trivial matter of personal preference, eating is an activity that has deep moral and spiritual significance. Surprising as it may sound, the simple question of what to eat can prompt Christians daily to live out their spiritual vision of Shalom for all creatures--to bear witness to the marginalization of the poor, the exploitation of the oppressed, the (...)
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Folgt aus dem unwert der Tierhaltung ein Verbot des Fleischkonsums?Simon Gaus - 2013 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 88 (1):257-267.
    It is natural to assume that it can only be morally permissible for consumers to buy meat products if the breeding and killing of animals for the purpose of meat production is morally acceptable. is assumption presupposes a stable and morally relevant connection between the consumption and the production of meat. While both act-consequentialism and the Kantian idea of generalizability initially appear to support that view, neither of them succeeds in establishing a connection of the required kind.
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  65
    Ethics for Fish.Eliot Michaelson & Andrew Reisner - 2018 - In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Food Ethics. New York, USA: 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 (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 82