ipl-logo

Controversy And Debate Arisen Over The Ethics Of Eating Animals

1316 Words6 Pages

ETHICS AND VALUES

Assignment 2

“EATING ANIMALS”

Prepared by: Meet Kundariya

-14BCH029

In many societies, controversy and debate have arisen over the ethics of eating

animals.

Hinduism holds vegetarianism as an ideal for three reasons: the principle of

nonviolence (ahimsa) applied to animals; the intention to offer only "pure"

(vegetarian) or sattvic food to a deity; and the conviction that an insentient diet is

beneficial for a healthy body and mind and that non-vegetarian food is detrimental

for the mind and for spiritual development. Buddhist vegetarianism has similar

strictures against hurting animals. Islamic Law and Judaism have dietary

guidelines called Halal and Kashrut, respectively. Causing unnecessary pain to

animals is prohibited by …show more content…

Problems with the consequentialist argument

If it is true that the world would be a better place if everyone was a vegetarian,

does it follow that any particular individual should be a vegetarian?

Some philosophers say it doesn't. They say:

The meat business is so huge that the loss of an individual consumer will make no

difference to it, and so will make no difference to the amount of goodness in the

world.

Other philosophers disagree, and say:

Someone who eats meat is approving of and collaborating in the wrongful acts of

the agriculture business, and it is morally wrong to approve of and collaborate in

wrongful acts, even indirectly.

The first philosopher might reply:

Because the meat business is so huge, the indirect participation or non-

participation of an individual in any wrongful acts that the industry may carry will

not influence the continuing of those acts.

Since an individual's acts do not cause or encourage the wrong-doing to take place,

they are not themselves morally wrong.

The virtue argument

Virtue ethics regard the motivation and character of a person as crucial to

Show More
Related
562 Words | 3 Pages

Jonathan Safran Foer’s Let them Eat Dog is a comical persuasive essay about the arbitrary boundaries that society places over the consumption of animals. He successfully points out the almost silly rules certain cultures place over eating certain animals, using the example that Americans generally viewing “eating ‘man’s best friend’ … as taboo”. (Foer 332) There are many different cultures around the world, each of which have their own general beliefs and social norms. One of these norms is what people should or should not eat.

Read More
699 Words | 3 Pages

Is eating meat a detrimental threat to the environment? This debate over meat’s involvement in the global warming crisis was what inspired Nicolette Hahn Niman to write, “The Carnivore’s Dilemma.” Niman hoped writing, “The Carnivore’s Dilemma,” would cause her audience to understand that eating meat, raised on traditional farms, was a superior alternative to vegetarianism. Niman supported her claim by explaining how industrialized farms and vegetarians produce more of the three greenhouse gases that caused global warming, than that produced by traditional farms. Niman’s article fell short of being effective due to flaws in her supporting evidence and conclusion.

Read More
1766 Words | 8 Pages

Ever since the beginning of time, meat has been a staple of the human diet. People have many reasons why they chose not to consume meat. One of the most common reasons some people chose not to eat meat is because they believe that it is unethical. There are many processes required in order to produce meat for conception, and these processes have become widely known to the public and cause a great deal of controversy. Animals are often tortured, genetically modified, and live in squalid conditions before they become the meat we put on our dinner tables.

Read More
577 Words | 3 Pages

He presents a compelling argument for why we have to recall lowering or casting off our intake of animal products, the use of evidence and records to guide his claims. for example, Foer cites the fact that animal agriculture is chargeable for more greenhouse gas emissions than all kinds of transportation combined. via presenting this statistic in a clean and concise manner, Foer makes a robust case for the environmental blessings of lowering our meat consumption. Foer additionally appeals to our sense of morality and values. He emphasizes the significance of compassion and duty in our food choices, encouraging readers to remember the ethical implications of consuming meat.

Read More
269 Words | 2 Pages

For vegetarians, animal rights should trump human rights. In “Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights,” Tom Regan defines animal rights as “the natural right to life” (307). Similar to Regan, many vegetarians believe that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. By switching to a plant-base diet, people will be able to alleviate the needless suffering and deaths of countless animals. Besides, in the same article, Regan also suggests “to treat animals in a more humane manner” (308).

Read More
704 Words | 3 Pages

Namit Arora, author of the article “On Eating Animals”, harshly captures the inhumane production of meat in America with repulsive imagery and shocking details. Arora, writer at thehumanist.com, reveals the immediate attention that Americans give to their pets and news-famous animals like Molly a runaway cow, yet they neglect to realize the millions of livestock being killed daily. With an accusatory and critical tone Arora condemns the hypocrisy of those who are pro-life for animals, but they still consume meat products. In return, this clarifies the injustice towards these animals for his American readers and global viewers. Namit Arora’s devastating imagery underscores the brutality of American actions towards innocent animals with descriptions such as, “the cow, bellowing miserably and hobbling like a drunk for several seconds before collapsing” and, “...died on the street in a pool of blood.”

Read More
732 Words | 3 Pages

Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals is a book about persuasion. Foer seeks to convince his readers to take any step in reducing what he believes is the injustice of harming animals. To achieve this, Foer employs many persuasion techniques and often changes his approach when he targets specific groups. His strategies include establishing himself as an ethical authority and appealing to his readers’ emotions, morals, and reason.

Read More
275 Words | 2 Pages

One of the most important factors of a leader being successful at war is having strong support from their home front and Adolf Hitler used this to his advantage a multitude of times during his reign as chancellor of Germany through the use of propaganda. One example of this was on September 1st, 1939 when Adolf Hitler ordered a blitzkrieg attack at Germany’s eastern border, unto Poland. This act he knew, would trigger a declaration of war from England. On the same day as the attack “The New York Times” reported Hitler as to have said “Germans in Poland are persecuted with a bloody terror and are driven from their homes. The series of border violations, which are unbearable to a great power, prove that the Poles no longer are willing to respect the German frontier.”

Read More
528 Words | 3 Pages

Finally, the quality of counterargument expressed throughout Garretson’s essay, has also been effected by her biased stance on vegetarianism, because she has been unable to display and acknowledge opposing views in her piece. It is very important for one to present counterarguments in their writing because it shows that the writer is not narrow-minded, and instead, is fair by considering other perspectives. Additionally, the use of counterargument adds credibility to a writing and makes the arguments that one presents more believable and trustworthy. Since Garretson does not display or acknowledge any opposing views in her essay, her arguments lose a great deal of credibility. There are many different approaches that Garretson could have taken

Read More
1149 Words | 5 Pages

The act of eating meat has caused many questions of morality to arise over the years; starting with Plutarch questioning the morality of slaughtering animals, Shelly writing about the physical act of eating meat, and Welin et al questioning whether growing meat in a lab is morally okay. The first morality question is asked by the Greek philosopher Plutarch when he speaks about the way meat was being “harvested” in his time. To begin, Plutarch brings up his first major issue expressing his disapproval of the idea that people hold the power to decide which animals live and die. Plutarch brings up multiple examples of why he believes this throughout the article, one of the more powerful points was when Plutarch(n.d) said, “Catch the harmless and tame sort, and such as have neither stings nor teeth to bite with, and slay them”(p. 9).

Read More
193 Words | 1 Pages

Thesis There is a growing consent that factory farming of animals or concentrated animal feeding operations is morally

Read More
796 Words | 4 Pages

In the article, “Is It Possible to be a Conscientious Meat Eater”, the authors argue that processed meat can greatly affect the many things in our everyday life. Sunaura and Alexander’s argument is significantly unreliable because of the certain professions both authors yield. As stated in the article “Sunaura is an artist, writer, and activist in Oakland.” “Alexander’s profession is studying philosophy, and ethics in Athens, Georgia.” This shows that neither of them are qualified to argue in the subject of conscientious meat eaters.

Read More
128 Words | 1 Pages

Martin Luther was a monk and a professor at the university of wittenberg. This is where he lectured about the bible. Martin Luther's 95 thesis was an act against the selling of indulgences. He thought that the selling of indulgences was a harm to the church and he acted against it. He did not think of it as rebelling, but he sent letters to the high bishop and the rest of the church counsel.

Read More
768 Words | 4 Pages

In today’s world, there is a division among the people in the world regarding whether or not it is ethical to eat meat. After researching about eating meat and vegetarianism, I have come to the conclusion that it is indeed ethical to eat meat in today’s society. Sure, eating meat might have its drawbacks, but I have found that the benefits of eating meat far outweigh the negatives of eating it. Eating meat not only helps improve people’s health, but it also helps strengthen our economy and it has little difference in the environmental impact that involves in the farming of vegetables. Eating too much of anything usually results in a negative outcome.

Read More
1227 Words | 5 Pages

Meat of animals gives protein to body. They killed animals for getting nutritional value. Human’s demand for animal is fast growing in the moment. Shop and buffet about meat have increase follow their demand. Dimitrios Chaniotis is manager and researcher that has written article about Is it moral or immoral to kill animals?

Read More

More about Controversy And Debate Arisen Over The Ethics Of Eating Animals

Related Topics

Open Document