By Andrew F. Smith
Drawing on study in plant technology, structures ecology, environmental philosophy, and cultural anthropology, Andrew F. Smith shatters the excellence among vegetarianism and omnivorism. The ebook outlines the consequences that those synthetic differences have for a way we view nutrition and ourselves as eaters.
Read or Download A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism PDF
Best public health books
This undergraduate textbook outlines the elements of the U. S. healthiness care supply process, its ancient origins, the outpatient and first care prone, inpatient care amenities, and the criteria at the back of escalating bills. The 3rd version displays fresh info and study findings, and handle
People are diurnal organisms whose organic clock and temporal association depend upon common light/dark cycles. alterations within the photoperiod are a sign for seasonal acclimatization of physiological and immune platforms in addition to behavioral styles. the discovery of electric mild bulbs created extra possibilities for paintings and relaxation.
- Emergency Medical Services: At the Crossroads
- Contemporary Public Health: Principles, Practice, and Policy
- Nutrient Metabolism (Food Science and Technology International)
- Britain's Imperial Cornerstone in China: The Chinese Maritime Customs Service, 1854-1949
Extra info for A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism
She is not condemning the diet of the Inuit, for example, who rely heavily for food on seals, sea lions, and caribou. , 83; see also Kheel 1995). , 105; see also Smith 1993). Rod Preece, a fellow adherent of ontological veganism, takes an even stronger stance against the relational hunt, challenging a common defense of sacred eating offered by indigenous hunters. Karen Warren (1990, 146) quotes a Lakota elder who is instructing his son about how to engage with deer during the hunt. Shoot “your four-legged brother” in the hindquarters to slow him down without killing him, the father advises.
Ontological vegans (and ontological vegetarians) simply extend it to encompass animals as well. So animals essentially become honorary masters alongside humans. ). But they still buy into a view, shared by proponents of human mastery, that does not square with the reality of our ecological embeddedness. We 44 A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism are all inescapably natural-born killers and natural-born food, I stated in the previous chapter. Noddings is right. Everyone survives on the lives of others and fosters others’ lives in death.
And this suggests, quite problematically from the viewpoint of ontological vegetarians, that they owe their lives to the fact that they are edible for us. Ontological vegans take the further step of rejecting any use of animals whatsoever (Plumwood 2000, 297). Carol Adams serves as an exemplar of ontological veganism, Plumwood contends. Adams emphasizes that humans do not need to prey on other animals to survive. Indeed, there is nothing the least bit Animism 43 natural about the systematic torture and slaughter of billions of beings via “the grossly inhumane institutions of the animalindustrial complex” (1993, 200), Adams proclaims.