i wonder how much of this mistreatment is new...certainly technology provides new ways of mistreating animals, but i would assume that people have been mistreating animals for a very long time...of course there is a difference between raising your own animals and buying an anonymous package at the supermarket, a certain loss of control of the humanity of the slaughtering process...but i also question the blanket "don't eat meat" statements for nutritional reasons as well...some nutritionists would hold that some people thrive best with at least some meat in their diet, not simply because it is protein, but for more specific nutritional qualities of animal protein...some nutritionists, of course, would not agree, which is also a testament to the fact that nutritional science is still in its early stages...so i don't simply see it as an ethical issue, but a nutritional one as well
I'm not sure I agree with your last sentence entirely. There are many factors that make our bodies nutritionally "need" something. Habits can dictate how our bodies respond to meat, as can the psychosomatic qualities of believing that meat makes us feel better. I don't like using this extreme analogy, but cigarettes are only necessary once a habit has been established, and we think we are better off once we have satisfied our craving (and thus we can function better after feeding the need).
However, your avoiding the whole point of this video - this video has everything to do about the ethics of meat. Is it ethical to eat meat? I think the only way to talk about it is ethically - you can argue that ethically, in order to survive, one would need to eat meat (I'm not really sold on "thriving best" argument, but I would like to hear more on that), thus citing a nutritional point. What I mean is that the only reason you would be making the meat issue a nutritional issue is to justify eating meat (ethically speaking).
I don't agree that the only way to talk about is ethically--there is more to meat, and animals in general, than the ethics of consuming them. I think the nutritional factor is important, and like the ethical issue, is much more of a personal issue than is generally recognized. And I don't think there is a simple, blanket answer to the question. Each individual has his or her priorities--if you are in a financial situation where eating meat is more efficient than not eating meat in feeding your family, that is an important factor to consider. And what if you raise your own animals and slaughter them in a humane way? I think observing how different peoples have treated this issue through time is instructive--I think it is often more ethical to honor slaughter of an animal, like a Native American, than to assume that because you are killing a semi-sentient being you are committing an unethical act. If you kill the animal instantly and painlessly, why is it unethical?
Also, i see why you used the cigarette example, but it falls apart quickly--whereas there is nothing in a cigarette that is essential or even wholly beneficial for the body and mind, the interaction between meat and the human body, keeping in mind that every body is different has different needs, is very complex and we don't know much about it. It is not simply a matter of protein.
Also, why extend the moral circle of care to animals? Is it a matter of pain, of consciousness? Is it less ethical to eat a cow than it is to eat a worm? This is another part of the problem--the question "is it ethical to eat meat" is not very subtle, because it ignores the nature of what one could call the scale of consciousness (plants are less conscious than animals, animals less so than humans). Some, including me, hold the idea that it is less ethical to kill a creature higher up on the scale--it is less ethical to kill a human than it is a cow. But because of the nature of the scale, where one draws the line is, in some ways, arbitrary. A plant is a living thing with a form of consciousness--is it unethical to eat a plant? Certainly some hold this view as well. The subtely I think lies is the balance--a human obviously needs food of some kind to survive, so he must draw the line somewhere.
J said on 04/05/13:
ReplyDeletei wonder how much of this mistreatment is new...certainly technology provides new ways of mistreating animals, but i would assume that people have been mistreating animals for a very long time...of course there is a difference between raising your own animals and buying an anonymous package at the supermarket, a certain loss of control of the humanity of the slaughtering process...but i also question the blanket "don't eat meat" statements for nutritional reasons as well...some nutritionists would hold that some people thrive best with at least some meat in their diet, not simply because it is protein, but for more specific nutritional qualities of animal protein...some nutritionists, of course, would not agree, which is also a testament to the fact that nutritional science is still in its early stages...so i don't simply see it as an ethical issue, but a nutritional one as well
H said on 04/07/13 @ 12:55pm:
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I agree with your last sentence entirely. There are many factors that make our bodies nutritionally "need" something. Habits can dictate how our bodies respond to meat, as can the psychosomatic qualities of believing that meat makes us feel better. I don't like using this extreme analogy, but cigarettes are only necessary once a habit has been established, and we think we are better off once we have satisfied our craving (and thus we can function better after feeding the need).
However, your avoiding the whole point of this video - this video has everything to do about the ethics of meat. Is it ethical to eat meat? I think the only way to talk about it is ethically - you can argue that ethically, in order to survive, one would need to eat meat (I'm not really sold on "thriving best" argument, but I would like to hear more on that), thus citing a nutritional point. What I mean is that the only reason you would be making the meat issue a nutritional issue is to justify eating meat (ethically speaking).
J said on 04/07/13 @ 1:09pm:
ReplyDeleteI don't agree that the only way to talk about is ethically--there is more to meat, and animals in general, than the ethics of consuming them. I think the nutritional factor is important, and like the ethical issue, is much more of a personal issue than is generally recognized. And I don't think there is a simple, blanket answer to the question. Each individual has his or her priorities--if you are in a financial situation where eating meat is more efficient than not eating meat in feeding your family, that is an important factor to consider. And what if you raise your own animals and slaughter them in a humane way? I think observing how different peoples have treated this issue through time is instructive--I think it is often more ethical to honor slaughter of an animal, like a Native American, than to assume that because you are killing a semi-sentient being you are committing an unethical act. If you kill the animal instantly and painlessly, why is it unethical?
Is it ethical for a cheetah to eat an antelope?
J said on 04/07/13 @ 1:19pm:
ReplyDeleteAlso, i see why you used the cigarette example, but it falls apart quickly--whereas there is nothing in a cigarette that is essential or even wholly beneficial for the body and mind, the interaction between meat and the human body, keeping in mind that every body is different has different needs, is very complex and we don't know much about it. It is not simply a matter of protein.
J said on 04/07/13 @ 2:41pm:
ReplyDeleteAlso, why extend the moral circle of care to animals? Is it a matter of pain, of consciousness? Is it less ethical to eat a cow than it is to eat a worm? This is another part of the problem--the question "is it ethical to eat meat" is not very subtle, because it ignores the nature of what one could call the scale of consciousness (plants are less conscious than animals, animals less so than humans). Some, including me, hold the idea that it is less ethical to kill a creature higher up on the scale--it is less ethical to kill a human than it is a cow. But because of the nature of the scale, where one draws the line is, in some ways, arbitrary. A plant is a living thing with a form of consciousness--is it unethical to eat a plant? Certainly some hold this view as well. The subtely I think lies is the balance--a human obviously needs food of some kind to survive, so he must draw the line somewhere.