[PREV - THUNDERBALL] [TOP]
VEGE
February 6, 2007
I'm not a
vegetarian. Or rather,
I'm the A semi-coherent article in
It seems to world's "The Nation" by Daniel Lazare
me that wimpiest raises me from my slumbers.
there are vegetarian.
many Title: "My Beef With
arguments I skip eating Vegetarianism",
for eating meat half of the a review of "Bloodless Maybe
*less* meat time because I Revolution" by Tristram I have
that make just don't think Stuart. things
a lot of it's that to say
sense. fascinating. DANIELS_BEEF not yet
said.
Health-oriented,
Financial, Can't
Environmental/Political... have
that,
None of these strike me can we?
as very good arguments High meat diets may
for eating *zero* meat. often be bad news
health-wise, but
there are some Meat may indeed
The one argument that light-meat cuisines be a waste of
gets you to zero, with a good record resources (you
is the notion that for longevity. can feed more
the division between people with the
animals and humans grain you feed
should be abandoned. cattle than with
the cattle), but
Animal rights should that just means
be the same as human The usual rhetoric we should treat
rights. involves drawing an it appropriately
analogy with the as a "luxury"
history of racism. item.
Once black people
were not regarded Dropping the (hidden)
as fully human, now political subsidies
that attitude is of the cattle
anathema. industry would be all
to the good.
So, regarding anything
as not being fully We could stop giving
human is tantamount them a free ride on
to racism. public property for
example.
Anything?
Worms, rocks, Conservatives weep
toasters? at the thought of
Spinach? a "commons": So,
George Bush? why not take aim
at the cowboys?
Another common (But this is an
philosophy: animals argument about how
can experience pain, meat-animals should
and therefore are be raised, not whether
equivalents of human Perhaps notably: the word they should be
beings. "sentient" once meant the raised.)
ability to feel.
(That is, when the
philosophy is not A generation of science
the protection of fiction writers (Larry Niven
all things cute and co) have managed to
and fuzzy.) convince that it means the
ability to think.
Myself, I'm the It's a nearly
kind of guy who useless word I've seen it suggested
thinks that the now, because (wikipedia) that there was
central aspect of it's hard to a confusion of "sentience"
humanity is our know which and "sapience". This sounds
intelligence. way it's being plausible.
used.
Of course, I would
say that, since I (Unless you're
often claim that I someone who
myself am intelligent, likes to
except for the explicitly
occasional note of define
false (?) modesty. terminology.)
People who had
trouble passing
calculus might
very well feel
nervous about that
standard, but I
myself am not
interested in A problem with the word "intelligence": we
withholding the worry a lot about fine-grained differences
human franchise in our daily lives, so if you appear to be
from them. saying that only the "intelligent" deserve
protection from slaughter, that's a reason
to be concerned.
Those tiny differences
aren't what I'm thinking
about, of course.
The idea that Einstein and Brittany
"all life is are both roughly on
sacred" doesn't the same level.
work of course.
There's a need to "play it
Isn't broccoli safe", to pick a boundary that
alive? respects any case that might
possibly deserve respect.
(I was tempted to make
You sometimes hear the idea that another George Bush joke
our bodies are poorly adapted to here, but enough...)
meat eating, because the
vegetarian capability is older.
You could find a
I actually don't know, but I suspect that particular example
this is wrong: we've been omnivores for of a "retarded"
an awfully long time now. human being that
would not seem so
Certainly there are some animals human to us;
that need to eat meat, that evolved but there isn't
to eat almost solely meat. any pressing
need to tune up
The notion that we (or perhaps, just some the definition
of us?) need to eat some small quantity that precisely.
of it isn't that absurd either.
TOUGH_CASES
Many "retarded" people
definitely do register
as human, and you don't
want to risk excluding
them with some clumsy
attempt at defining the
boundary.
Note: it could be this is case
where I know the answer I want
already in advance, and I'm
choosing a set of principles to
give the right answer.
Typical, isn't it?
It occurs to me that
the ideal meat-animal
would be bred with
an ugly coat, a bad
smell, and a nasty
temperament, to avoid (Once again, it takes
provoking any sympathy. effort to avoid making
a George Bush joke.)
--------
[NEXT - DANIELS_BEEF]