Virtue Ethical Argument In Defense Of Vegetarianism

I will argue that to be moral you must seek vegetarianism.

Over the past century, the discussion surrounding the morally correct practices involving the production and consumption of meat has been intensified. While these arguments have been successful in converting meat eaters to vegetarians or vegans, most of the general population is still unconvinced. This paper will be directed towards those that aren’t swayed and will give arguments for the reasons they should be. I will explore these arguments from a Care/Virtue Ethics perspective in the defense of vegetarianism and target the Consequentialist perspective that they aren’t morally obligated to stop eating meat. I will first analyze the Utilitarian arguments for vegetarianism, and

Firstly, consequentialism is the philosophical theory that states that all morality should be permissible on the basis of engaging in the right kinds of action (or excluding from acting at all). Moreover, a morally permissible action will produce an overall good outcome. A consequentialist solely believes that making unwanted dietary changes to his or her eating habits would result in bringing less inherent goods into their lifestyle than they were to obtain with their current meat-eating habits. A consequentialist would be willing to spend their time trying to increase the overall happiness in the world, and if becoming a vegetarian doesn’t fulfill “spending the valuable time wisely,” than it shouldn’t be obligatory. I will further argue that the, “its too demanding”, stereotype surrounding consequentialism is in fact false and that in regards to eating meat “is not demanding enough.” This discussion is directed towards those consequentialist who are dubious of becoming a vegetarian and following the integrities that motivate vegetarianism such as sensitivity, caring, honesty and