In Defense of Eating Meat

Hsiao, Timothy

doi:10.1007/s10806-015-9534-2

Cited by 44 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another strand of literature concludes that "ethically driven" vegetarianism is rather a specific way of living compared to merely a diet and points to the identity-creating power of vegetarianism [37][38][39]. One basic issue in the ethical discussions refers to the moral status of animals and the justification of causing suffering and pain to animals (e.g., compare [40,41].…”

Section: Ruby and Heinementioning

confidence: 99%

Vegetarianism/Veganism: A Way to Feel Good

Simons

Vierboom²,

Klink-Lehmann

et al. 2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have identified health, the environment and animal welfare as key motivations for becoming and remaining vegetarian/vegan. However, the idea of vegetarianism/veganism appears to have interesting facets that go beyond those drivers. This paper describes and examines this attraction. Twenty-six in depth interviews and two group discussions were conducted using the Morphological Psychology approach, which allows the revelation of conscious as well as unconscious drivers based on the detailed narrations of the interviewees. We conclude that the attractiveness of vegetarianism/veganism cannot only be explained by the classical and conscious motivations of a meatless or animal-free diet such as improving health and animal welfare. It also comprises less conscious or unconscious drivers of vegetarianism/veganism such as empowerment and enrichment, regaining autonomy and creating identity and superiority in addition to and partly through liberation from a meat production system which is perceived as destructive and threatening.

show abstract

Section: Ruby and Heinementioning

confidence: 99%

Vegetarianism/Veganism: A Way to Feel Good

Simons

Vierboom²,

Klink-Lehmann

et al. 2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 See, for instance, Liao (2010), Hsiao (2015), and Kagan (2016). 2 These accounts are not exhaustive.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem with Person-Rearing Accounts of Moral Status

Timmerman

Fischer²

2019

Thought: A Journal of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agnieszka Jaworska and Julie Tannenbaum recently developed the ingenious and novel person‐rearing account of moral status, which preserves the commonsense judgment that humans have a higher moral status than nonhuman animals. It aims to vindicate speciesist judgments while avoiding the problems typically associated with speciesist views. We argue, however, that there is good reason to reject person‐rearing views. Person‐rearing views have to be coupled with an account of flourishing, which will (according to Jaworska and Tannenbaum) be either a species norm or an intrinsic potential account of flourishing. As we show, however, person‐rearing accounts generate extremely implausible consequences when combined with the accounts of flourishing Jaworska and Tannenbaum need for the purposes of their view.

show abstract

“…Aside from these problems, the fact remains that the moral relevance of life is disputed by many, while the moral relevance of sentience is very rarely brought into question, with some exceptions (Hsiao 2015). The question of whether insects possess sentience thus seems like a good place to start when determining whether or not they should be granted moral status.…”

Section: Ethical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Edible insects – defining knowledge gaps in biological and ethical considerations of entomophagy

Pali‐Schöll

Binder

Moens

et al. 2018

Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While seeking novel food sources to feed the increasing population of the globe, several alternatives have been discussed, including algae, fungi or in vitro meat. The increasingly propagated usage of farmed insects for human nutrition raises issues regarding food safety, consumer information and animal protection. In line with law, insects like any other animals must not be reared or manipulated in a way that inflicts unnecessary pain, distress or harm on them. Currently, there is a great need for research in the area of insect welfare, especially regarding species-specific needs, health, farming systems and humane methods of killing. Recent results from neurophysiological, neuroanatomical and behavioral sciences prompt caution when denying consciousness and therefore the likelihood of presence of pain and suffering or something closely related to it to insects. From an animal protection point of view, these issues should be satisfyingly solved before propagating and establishing intensive husbandry systems for insects as a new type of mini-livestock factory farming.

show abstract

In Defense of Eating Meat

Cited by 44 publications

References 11 publications

Vegetarianism/Veganism: A Way to Feel Good

Vegetarianism/Veganism: A Way to Feel Good

The Problem with Person-Rearing Accounts of Moral Status

Edible insects – defining knowledge gaps in biological and ethical considerations of entomophagy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About