Vegetarianism versus Veganism versus Meat Eating

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I agree. That's why I eat meat.

Pass me a cheeseburger.

And redfarmer worries about vegetarians evangelizing.

How am I evangelizing? I'm telling you what I do, not what everyone else should do. (See above)

But it does bring up an interesting question. Why are (some) vegetarians always trying to convert meat eaters? I've never in my life heard a meat eater try to convert a vegetarian. It's sort of like a religion, I guess.

 

[citizenzen]

But it does bring up an interesting question. Why are (some) vegetarians always trying to convert meat eaters?

Who's trying to convert you?

 

[Furcifer]

Who's trying to convert you?

Usually the vegetarians that aren't just happy with shaming you.

 

[Retrograde]

An argument I rarely hear for vegetarianism is "I like vegetables". I'm not a vegetarian but I eat mostly vegetables because I like them, and since I live in an area close to where many of them are grown, I can get really good ones. I do vegan meals several times a week, but don't have any objection to throwing bones and bits of sausage into the bean pot. My basic philosophy is "vegetables are good, vegetarianism is bad".

Cheeseburgers? No, thank you. A piece of cheese and some steak tartare? Count me in!

 

[Tapio]

Whatever the stance on meat eating, I think comments like the ones The Central Scrutinizer and shemp have posted right at the beginning of this thread, are a bad call on a critical thinking forum. Reminds me of something Homer or the dumb cops from The Simpsons might say...Not to say I don't agree on some meat tasting good. But as a response to a genuine attempt at engaging in critical conversation about meat eating/not eating meat...

In any case, this subject has been quite well boiled in the past. Is it really necessary to start yet a new thread? Maybe dig one of the old ones up and add something to it?

 

[Eric D]

Since this is the elephant in the room on the foie gras thread, I thought I would start a thread on the merits of vegetarianism and veganism versus meat eating. I will start the discussion and hopefully we can critically think on some issues in this area.

I am a meat eater but I am also a former vegetarian. The reason I was a vegetarian was largely an emotional response from watching PETA videos, a reason I don't consider sufficient anymore to justify not eating meat. I, like most vegetarians and vegans I knew, were big into animal rights, which, along with the "health benefits argument", seems to be one of the biggest reasons for going vegetarian or vegan in our society right now.

So, I present for your consideration, this well-written blog article I found earlier:
Let Them Eat Meat - How the Ethical Argument for Veganism Fails and One Possible Way to Fix It

Essentially, the author argues that people do not become vegans because they want to reduce suffering; if that were the case, all you would have to do is say no to one Slim Jim in your life and you've reduced suffering. The vegan is committed to a rights approach which says that animals have rights. However, even the vegan cannot avoid causing suffering to animals unless they commit suicide, an option all sides will consider extreme. The vegan, he argues, unintentionally kills animals in the process of harvesting crops.

The author also presents some possible solutions for vegans. I'd be interested in some thoughtful responses to the article to start out a discussion of the merits of veganism/vegetarianism versus meat eating.

Do you really need a justification not to eat meat?

 

[Eric D]

How am I evangelizing? I'm telling you what I do, not what everyone else should do. (See above)

I've never in my life heard a meat eater try to convert a vegetarian.

I slowly converted my brother. Being around someone who ate delicious meat all the time broke his will.

 

[Wildy]

I don't really see a problem with people choosing to be vegetarian. It's not my decision to tell people what they can and can't eat. What I don't like is groups like PETA telling me that I shouldn't eat meat because they don't like it when people do.

And just to keep myself with the people not taking this thread seriously:

 

[Eric D]

I like the article in the OP by the way. Good read.

Edit: Although I do disagree that not having kids reduces suffering. Imagine how much suffering there would be if the elderly greatly out-numbered the amount of young people to take care of them. Suffering for both the young and elderly.

 

[Aepervius]

It's not quite so simple, Slim.

Another argument for vegetarianism is that it takes fewer resources to produce vegetable protein vs. an equal amount of animal protein.

Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based diets and the environment

David Pimentel and Marcia Pimentel
From the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

ABSTRACT

Worldwide, an estimated 2 billion people live primarily on a meat-based diet, while an estimated 4 billion live primarily on a plant-based diet. The US food production system uses about 50% of the total US land area, 80% of the fresh water, and 17% of the fossil energy used in the country. The heavy dependence on fossil energy suggests that the US food system, whether meat-based or plant-based, is not sustainable. The use of land and energy resources devoted to an average meat-based diet compared with a lactoovovegetarian (plant-based) diet is analyzed in this report. In both diets, the daily quantity of calories consumed are kept constant at about 3533 kcal per person. The meat-based food system requires more energy, land, and water resources than the lactoovovegetarian diet. In this limited sense, the lactoovovegetarian diet is more sustainable than the average American meat-based diet.
​

If you don't care about the suffering, consider the sustainability.

Sustainability for what ? Most meat produced here around is done on land which would not be farmed for crop *anyway*, either due to inclinaison, number of rocks, or even because of over production.

The argument might hold where bovin/ovin production is conccurencing crops, but where does that effectively happens ?

The problem of food today, is not a problem of sustainibility, it is a political problem, war problem, and distribution problem.

 

[Eric D]

Sustainability for what ? Most meat produced here around is done on land which would not be farmed for crop *anyway*, either due to inclinaison, number of rocks, or even because of over production.

What about the land used to grow feed for the livestock? Could that potentially be used for crops fit for human consumption?

 

[Skeletor]

I don't really see a problem with people choosing to be vegetarian. It's not my decision to tell people what they can and can't eat. What I don't like is groups like PETA telling me that I shouldn't eat meat because they don't like it when people do.

^^^This is the debate in a nutshell.

A good friend of mine is a vegetarian, and he didn't pressure it on me. I did end up trying it out for myself; but I had a craving for a bacon cheeseburger that would not quit! He didn't judge me for changing my mind. So now and forever, I am a Vegetarian Apostate.

 

[Brian-M]

So, I present for your consideration, this well-written blog article I found earlier:
Let Them Eat Meat - How the Ethical Argument for Veganism Fails and One Possible Way to Fix It

Essentially, the author argues that people do not become vegans because they want to reduce suffering; if that were the case, all you would have to do is say no to one Slim Jim in your life and you've reduced suffering. The vegan is committed to a rights approach which says that animals have rights. However, even the vegan cannot avoid causing suffering to animals unless they commit suicide, an option all sides will consider extreme. The vegan, he argues, unintentionally kills animals in the process of harvesting crops.

I started reading the article, but ended up skimming most of it because the author seems to be ignoring a very obvious point.

Sure, some animals do end up being killed or suffering as an unintended side-effect of horticulture. But what he's overlooking is that far fewer animals end up being killed or suffering than if the same land was being used to raise animals for slaughter.

It's like arguing that you shouldn't bother giving sick people medicine because occasionally medicine can cause harmful effects. (Ignoring the fact that benefit of medicine far outweighs the potential harm.)

Nobody ever got hooked on bacon and died from it.

(not for lack of trying)

Bacon is a very fatty food. Excessive consumption of fatty foods causes heart disease. Heart disease kills millions. [/devil's advocate]

No that was me.

We've got a religion devoted to pasta, that's a start.

But meatballs are a fundamental part of the FSM's nature.

 

[Furcifer]

What about the land used to grow feed for the livestock? Could that potentially be used for crops fit for human consumption?

Yes, and no. It could be but people prefer meat (because it tastes good). If people won't buy the veggies they get fed to the animals. If you're going to feed animals vegetables you may as well just grow feed. It's a viscous circle.

 

[Furcifer]

Bacon is a very fatty food. Excessive consumption of fatty foods causes heart disease. Heart disease kills millions. [/devil's advocate]

lol, dammit, I hate this analogy thing.

But meatballs are a fundamental part of the FSM's nature.

Word on the street is they're TVP.

Saying "because it tastes good" isn't exactly critical thinking, but I think it cuts to the quick. We're the top predator and we eat what we like. We like meat and we are prepared to kill for it (or let someone do it for us).
I was watching Human Planet the other day and there's a segment with some natives in Ethiopia. A very ancient tribe that's almost completely died out. But the heck if they don't like the taste of meat so much they chase off lions to get it. Walk right up to them and take it. (perhaps the reason their numbers on the decline)
If we ever gave up killing animals for meat we'd just employ predators to kill them for us. Now that's truly "inhumane".

 

[Eric D]

Yes, and no. It could be but people prefer meat (because it tastes good). If people won't buy the veggies they get fed to the animals. If you're going to feed animals vegetables you may as well just grow feed. It's a viscous circle.

I understand it comes down to consumer choice, but that's what many vegetarians/vegans are trying to influence. Influence more people to eat more plant-based food, and more land will be used to grow crops fit for human consumption.

I can't really say I disagree with vegans trying to persuade people to a more plant-based diet because it's healthier and probably better for the environment. But they should stop there, and not expect that everyone will adopt the same extreme position as them.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I wash't too impressed with the article. I know that some people think the "animals killed to harvest crops" argument is the perfect argument, but it only holds up if you take an extreme, and dare I say strawman, position. Killing animals in harvest is the minimum amount of suffering we can live on. Killing animals for food is more suffering and not at all necessary suffering. The author says this is making arbitrary distinctions, but that is what we all do. It is kinda the point of moral discourse.

The argument about killing always interests me is that the pro-meat-eating side seems to think that dying itself does not constitute harm. I've never understood this.

This is the crux of the author's argument:

If your principle is “reduce suffering,” all you need to do is say “no thanks” to a single Slim Jim once in your life and you’ve accomplished your goal. If your principle is “Reduce suffering to the maximum amount possible,” you need to kill yourself or at least go freegan. If your principle is “reduce suffering to the exact level that consumer veganism does,” then you better not judge someone whose principle is “reduce suffering to the exact level that turning down a single Slim Jim does.”

Which is obviously silly black/white thinking. The author has a real problem with anyone who doesn't live EXTREME. There are vegans who believe in hunting to stabilise populations, and there are meat eaters who don't believe in factory farming. The arguments about supposed "alternatives" are not readily available for most people to survive on, so I don't know how they can be moral alternatives. It is also ignored the people can do things because they have to and can regret them.

Personally, I've never understood the pro-meat eater antagonism. We can't debate dietary choices? We debate religion around here all the time. Why is killing cows suddenly a sacred cow?

 

[Rasmus]

But they should stop there, and not expect that everyone will adopt the same extreme position as them.

Why should they stop?

Seriously, I'll never understand these discussions - they reliably and utterly fail to be a good example of critical thinking.

If a vegetarian believes that eating meat is ethically wrong then of course they will try to bring about changes that make the meat-eating stop.

Why would they be expected to just explain that they don't happen to eat meat and leave it at that?

By all means, argue that they are wrong and that eating meat is not ethically wrong or not even a question about ethics - but why ask them to stop?

 

[Furcifer]

I understand it comes down to consumer choice, but that's what many vegetarians/vegans are trying to influence. Influence more people to eat more plant-based food, and more land will be used to grow crops fit for human consumption.

I can't really say I disagree with vegans trying to persuade people to a more plant-based diet because it's healthier and probably better for the environment. But they should stop there, and not expect that everyone will adopt the same extreme position as them.

I'm curious how successful their influencing has been. If anything I've seen more people drop it than take it up in the last 20 years, but I think it's typically something you do in highschool or university and then forget about after 10 years.
I think a healthy diet is one you enjoy that incorporates eating both. I still enjoy vegetarian dishes, but don't consciously limit myself.

 

[Eric D]

I started reading the article, but ended up skimming most of it because the author seems to be ignoring a very obvious point.

Sure, some animals do end up being killed or suffering as an unintended side-effect of horticulture. But what he's overlooking is that far fewer animals end up being killed or suffering than if the same land was being used to raise animals for slaughter.

It's obvious that you didn't read the whole thing then. Go back and read it in it's entirety. He addresses this multiple times.