Conscientious Meat

877 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essays on the concerns with eating meat

Isabella Weich
Philosophy 101
MWF 10:00

Analysis of “Is It Possible to Be a Conscientious Meat Eater?”

In their article, “Is It Possible to Be a Conscientious Meat Eater?” Sunaura Taylor and Alexander Taylor’s conclusion is that the production and consumption of meat is unethical. Their main arguments for the conclusion are that there is not a sufficient amount of meat to feed everyone in the world and that the concept of equality is based on suffering. In this paper I will analyze these two main points and explain why I believe meat should not be eaten as a staple.
Taylor and Taylor’s first argument is that there is not enough meat to feed everyone in the world. The unstated premise here is that if there is not enough meat to feed everyone, then the consumption of meat is unethical. First, they argue how a large percentage of land is being used for cattle-raising “instead of being used to grow staple crops, which could feed local people directly” (1). They support this by using the fact that it takes approximately 16 pounds of grain and 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat, which would feed one or two people compared to 16 people on grain (1). While many are dying of starvation, it seems unfair that the industrial meat industry benefits from this production. Next, they argue that this meat is high-priced and its production is a less-efficient use of land and resources. For example, “an acre of land used for grain-fed beef could feed 10 times as many people if used for crops” (4). Taylor and Taylor also argue that the concept of sustainability needs to be changed to question if the world’s population can be fed on sustainable animal products (2). They believe that “there is no truly sustainable and humane way to f...

... middle of paper ...

...ually be overpopulated. However, much of the animals we consume are bred in unnaturally high numbers so that enough meat is produced for us. This issue could be resolved if humans no longer ate meat because then there would be no reason to breed these animals and their numbers would return to normal.
Although I do not believe Taylor and Taylor’s argument is presented well, I do agree with them. They do not always bring up strong points and rarely provide adequate support, but they do have a good overall argument. It is unethical for humans to produce and consume meat. It is not realistic to ask people to stop eating meat, but it is something they can be eased into. The production of meat does not need to stop completely. However, humans should not be eating meat as a staple. By cutting down on meat production, more grain and water can be used to feed the hungry.

Show More
Related

  • More Pros Than Cons In A Meat-Free Life Analysis

    125 Words  | 1 Pages

    The argumentative article “More Pros than Cons in a Meat-Free Life” authored by Marjorie Lee Garretson was published in the student newspaper of the University of Mississippi in April 2010. In Garretson’s article, she said that a vegetarian lifestyle is the healthy life choice and how many people don’t know how the environment is affected by their eating habits. She argues how the animal factory farms mistreat the animals in an inhumane way in order to be sources of food. Although, she did not really achieve the aim she wants it for this article, she did not do a good job in trying to convince most of the readers to become vegetarian because of her writing style and the lack of information of vegetarian

    Read More

  • Eating Green Margaret Lundberg Summary

    1226 Words  | 3 Pages

    People can be classified into two categories, meat eaters and non meat eaters. Meat eaters or carnivores are common in society so there has to be a tremendous amount of meat production to meet these needs. But has anyone ever thought about the amount of fuel and energy it takes to make it and how it would ultimately destroy the Earth? Many have and it revealed to them that the cost of being a vegan or vegetarian is far less than continuing their carnivorous ways. Two authors have their opinions to offer, even if they are on the same side of the argument and want to convert people to being a vegan.

    Read More

  • Arguments Against Factory Farming: Alastair Norcross's Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases

    918 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...oss’ paper. Therefore, this objection is not sound because the number of naïve people are rapidly dwindling. The second objection stated that one person has no effect on the factory farming industry, so giving up meat is pointless because the industry is too large to feel the effects of someone converting to vegetarianism. I refuted this objection by saying that, yes, one person alone will not make a difference, but when more and more people become vegetarians, the industry will be forced to respond by producing less animals, therefore, preventing more animal suffering. Although these two objections were strong and valid, I believe I was able to successfully defend Norcross’ argument that factory farming is wrong and cruel.

    Read More

  • Kantianism And Utilitarianism

    708 Words  | 2 Pages

    After reading the Ethics of What We Eat, one may conclude that there are two normative principles that can be applied when ruling the ethics behind our food (Utilitarianism and Kantianism). Utilitarianism, which focuses on the consequences of actions, emphasizes that actions are right in proportion when they promote happiness and wrong as they tend to reverse it. On the contrary, Kantianism does not concern itself with the consequences in considering what’s right or wrong. Instead, what’s right is not the maximization of happiness, but the morality of the actions that lead to such happiness. Because of these opposite ideologies, using animals for food, its environmental impact, and its impact on global poverty can be controversial.

    Read More

  • Summary Of An Animals Place By Michael Pollan

    497 Words  | 1 Pages

    Personally, I partially disagree with the argument. I support the idea that farm animals should be treated in a more humane way, but I do not think that we should stop consuming animals. They have been part of our diet for ages. Their meat is packed with essential nutrients, like proteins and

    Read More

  • Alastair Norcross: The Marginal Case

    1872 Words  | 4 Pages

    Alastair Norcross introduces a very controversial case. He compares the actions of Fred as being morally equal to factory farming. Norcross presents the Marginal case and the Analogy argument. There are many objections to his beliefs such as; the suffering of the puppies is intended as a means to Fred’s pleasure, whereas the suffering of factory raised animals is merely foreseen as a side effect of a system that is a means to the gustatory pleasure of millions. Also, the individual consumers lack the power to put an end to factory farming. And lastly, human beings have a greater moral status than nonhumans. (Norcross, 285) I disagree with Norcross’s statement saying that Fred’s behavior and that of people who consume factory-farmed meat is morally equivalent.

    Read More

  • Ethics and Morality in Vegetarianism

    1942 Words  | 4 Pages

    Realizing the necessity of refraining from meat is especially difficult because people consume it for a long time, and in addition, there is a certain attitude to the meat as to the product that is useful, nourishing and even prestigious. On the other hand, the constant consumption of meat has made the vast majority of people completely emotionless towards it. However, there must be some real and strong reasons for refusal to consume meat and as I noticed they were always completely different. So, even though vegetarianism has evolved drastically over time, some of its current forms have come back full circle to resemble that of its roots, when vegetarianism was an ethical-philosophical choice, not merely a matter of personal health. As believed, vegetarianism was originally founded in ancient India and was generally formed on ethical and moral issues.

    Read More

  • Eating Animals, by Jonathan Safran Foer

    946 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, the author talks about, not only vegetarianism, but reveals to us what actually occurs in the factory farming system. The issue circulating in this book is whether to eat meat or not to eat meat. Foer, however, never tries to convert his reader to become vegetarians but rather to inform them with information so they can respond with better judgment. Eating meat has been a thing that majority of us engage in without question. Which is why among other reasons Foer feels compelled to share his findings about where our meat come from. Throughout the book, he gives vivid accounts of the dreadful conditions factory farmed animals endure on a daily basis. For this reason Foer urges us to take a stand against factory farming, and if we must eat meat then we must adapt humane agricultural methods for meat production.

    Read More

  • Should We Be Vegetarians?

    1159 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper I will look at the argument made by James Rachels in his paper, The Moral Argument for Vegetarianism supporting the view that humans should be vegetarians on moral grounds. I will first outline the basis of Rachels’ argument supporting vegetarianism and his moral objection to using animals as a food source and critique whether it is a good argument. Secondly, I will look at some critiques of this kind of moral argument presented by R. G. Frey in his article, Moral Vegetarianism and the Argument from Pain and Suffering. Finally, I will show why I support the argument made by Frey and why I feel it is the stronger of the two arguments and why I support it.

    Read More

  • Why Eating Meat is Morally Impermissible

    1449 Words  | 3 Pages

    Is it morally permissible to eat meat? Much argument has arisen in the current society on whether it is morally permissible to eat meat. Many virtuous fruitarians and the other meat eating societies have been arguing about the ethics of eating meat (which results from killing animals). The important part of the dispute is based on the animal welfare, nutrition value from meat, convenience, and affordability of meat-based foods compared to vegetable-based foods and other factors like environmental moral code, culture, and religion. All these points are important in justifying whether humans are morally right when choosing to eat meat. This paper will argue that it is morally impermissible to eat meat by focusing on the treatment of animals, the environmental argument, animal rights, pain, morals, religion, and the law.

    Read More

  • Animal Welfare In Farming

    1683 Words  | 4 Pages

    The moral responsibilities of America's agricultural industry is an issue that posess no current solution. The only current solutions are the creation of cheap synthetic meat or a change of how Americans veiw animal morality. Synthetic meat only appears as a distant solution on the horizon. The only current solution to animal morality is a change in how we veiw animals. They posess no ablilty to be moral so it falls upon humans as the intellegant race to be humane to animals and treat them with kindeness we bestow upon other humans.

    Read More

  • It is Better to be a Vegetarian

    1128 Words  | 3 Pages

    For several years the issue of eating meat has been a great concern to all types of people all over the world. In many different societies controversy has began to arise over the morality of eating meat from animals. A lot of the reasons for not eating meat have to deal with religious affiliations, personal health, animal rights, and concern about the environment. Vegetarians have a greater way of expressing meats negative effects on the human body whereas meat eaters have close to no evidence of meat eating being a positive effect on the human body. Being a vegetarian is more beneficial for human beings because of health reasons, environmental issues, and animal rights.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On Eating Meat

    1598 Words  | 4 Pages

    Every person has the ability to make their own choice of whether to eat meat or not. However, eating meat is directly tied to negative health effects, pollution leading to a depletion of ozone, and the depletion of hundreds of thousands of acres of land “wasted” on animal production when they could be used to solve the hunger crisis or lower emission levels. What humans eat is no longer a matter of choice; it has become a matter of life and death. Literally, the future of the whole planet rests on the decision of whether or not to eat meat. If humans chose to eat less meat the world that wouldn’t have to suffer the consequences (outlined above.) Vegetarianism is one possibility, as is Veganism; however the world would be

    Read More

  • Should we all become vegetarians?

    796 Words  | 2 Pages

    As we can now observe, vegetarianism has become something fashionable, and the number of people who reject eating meat is constantly increasing. In Britain, for instance, over 5 million people have done it so far. It is obviously connected with the recent animal diseases, but this tendency is likely to spread on the other regions of the world. However, it is not only a fashion or fear of illnesses. I myself became a vegetarian about 2 years ago, and I can see a number of reasons why people should stop eating meat. They are mainly of ethic, economic and health type. Those who think in an ecological way should also be aware of how this meat consumption ruins our environment. I don’t have an intention to force anybody to become a vegetarian, but I hope that my argumentation would be strong enough to make some people think about it, at least. In this essay I will try to present this point of view, expressing my personal feelings and showing scientific facts about the problem.

    Read More

  • Should People Become Vegetarian?

    1082 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, many people still refuse to be a vegetarian for different reasons. Some people prefer the taste of meat, and some people believe that they are born to eat meat. Despite that about 2 billion people in the world live basically on the meat diet, around 4 billion people live mainly on a plant-based diet because of food shortage(Pimentel ＆ Pimentel, 2003, pp660S). As everyone knows, the number of population is growing. For example, the total U.S. population doubled in the previous 60 years, and it may double again in the next 70 years (Pimentel ＆ Pimentel, 2003, pp660S). People won’t have enough meat to eat in the future. On the other hand, a well-planned vegetarian diet offers many health benefits. Therefore, people should become vegetarian because it benefits to huma...

    Read More

More about Conscientious Meat

Open Document