Brian et al.,
The difference between a pig and a carrot is in part due to the fact that
we judge the pig more like us and therefore more deserving of moral
consideration as a sort of quasi-human. But where does one draw the
line? At fowl, fish, crabs, clams... eggs, milk... ? As for a way of
eating without
killing anything... that presumably depends on treating the individual
organism as the entity the life of which must not be taken. Again, that
presumes a human/individualistic basis for moral judgments that may be
difficult to generalize to, say, social insects.
I agree that with a human population of 5.6 billion or so our species can
no longer afford to eat much meat, but that is quite apart from arguing that
killing animals for food is immoral per se. It all depends on whether
the specific use of animal part or product for human food has an
unacceptably high environmental cost.
As for hunting never having played an essential dietary role, consider
arctic and sub-arctic peoples. Agriculture at such high latitudes is
impossible without very large inputs of fossil fuel energy that are
ultimately more ecologically destructive than hunting. Before you
dismiss Inuit/Eskimo and sub-Arctic Indian hunters as concerned only with
trophies, consider what they have to say. For example, read Richard K.
Nelson's _Make Prayers to the Raven_.
Gene Hunn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]/Dept. of Anthropology, University of
Washington, Seattle, WA 98103)
On Sun, 25 Sep 1994, Brian A. Luke wrote:
>
> > Those who oppose eating meat or any
> > animal products seem to be motivated by a certain revulsion at taking the
> > life of an animal. However, what of the plants? Is there a clear moral
> > distinction between parasitizing animals to sustain our life and
> > parasitizing plants?
>
> Three points:
>
> 1) For most of us there is a undeniable moral difference between
> killing a carrot and killing a pig;
>
> 2) If one is concerned about plants, it is apparently possible in many
> ecological niches to feed oneself without killing anything, plant or
> animal.
>
> 3) At any rate, it would seem that by eating as vegans, we can lessen
> our impact on animals AND plants, since 80% of the cultivated land in
> the US is used to grow crops to feed to farmed animals.
>
>
> > Hunters and gatherers
> > are taught to respect their prey while at the same time killing what the
> > must have to live.
> >
>
> I would describe the situation differently--hunters are taught a
> range of rituals and stories that they use to ease their guilt at
> killing animals. For instance, they are told that utilizing all parts
> of the animal's corpse excuses them from the crime of killing. Then
> they call the hunters who follow such guidelines "respectful." To
> me this has nothing to do with respect, it is just self-deception done
> to relieve one's conscience pangs. Respecting another animal means
> (at least in part) recognizing that it is not in that animal's
> interest to die to provide you with a "venison roast," and whether or
> not you use his or her whole body does not change the harm done to the
> animal. So true respect for the other animals doesn't mean killing
> them carefully, but rather it means finding ways to meet our needs
> without killing them at all.
>
> Brian
>
>
