Meat Consumption, Essay Example

Part 1: Ethical Question

Is it always wrong to eat animals?

Part 2: Introduction

The question as to whether it is okay to consume animal flesh is one of the key issues in food ethics. A significant number of people believe it is morally and ethically wrong, while others hold that it is right to eat animal flesh. According to Reid (2013), about three out of one hundred U.S citizens are vegetarians. The number is even steeper in other regions, such as India, where nearly a third of the populace are vegetarians. Individuals chose to abstain from meat consumption, citing various reasons such as animal welfare, environmental effects of meat production, and health risks associated with meat consumption.

Many individuals who object to meat consumption usually cite various practices involved in the production of meat; others relay concerns about the welfare of the animals, environmental concerns, and various cultural and religious reasons. Inversely, proponents of meat consumption cite many scientific, cultural, and religious tenets in support of the practice. In some scenarios, meat consumption proponents oppose a certain way of rearing animals, such as factory farms, or killing them animals with cruelty; consequently, others do not indulge in certain flesh delicacies such as veal or foie gras.

Peter Singer, a renowned animal rights crusader, claims that humans can remain healthy without necessarily consuming meat or other animal products (Reid, 2013). He argues that there are various alternatives to animal meat, and this should help us abstain from causing unnecessary harm to animals. In his critically acclaimed book, Animal Liberation, Singer argues that non-human animals also have feelings, and we should always aspire to treat them as per utilitarian ethics. His works have since been widely developed upon by numerous philosophers, both those who are in agreement and those that disagree, and it also has been widely used by animal rights crusaders in driving their agenda.

Ethical vegetarian issues are now widely accepted in developed countries, this partly due to the growing number of factory farms, and the general access of graphic information about animal abuses and what generally animal flesh consumption translates into for animals, and the environmental effects of animal factory farming. On the other hand, pro meat consumption holds that the increased demand for animal flesh can only be met through a mass-production system, irrespective of animal welfare (Reid, 2013). Meat consumption proponents with less radical views advocate for animal rearing practices that are well managed or consumption of wild animals whose predators are fewer in number to meet the meat demand.

Part 3: Explanation of the Ethical Theory

Virtue ethics is one of the three core approaches in normative ethics; others are deontology and utilitarianism. Virtue ethics mainly focus on the essence and character of the individual involved in acting. The tenet of virtue ethics postulates that we should not judge action rather characters. Living a morally upright life, on this formulation, does not necessarily concern itself with carrying out the right acts, but rather it encourages the development of virtuous propensity and temperament (Thames, 2018). Virtue is a complex terminology, but it is usually drawn up in two key ways. Virtues can either be looked at as characters that are vital for a successful life or as traits that are overall deemed admirable.

When assessing the moral aptness of actions, such as consuming animal meat, virtue ethics, usually conceptualizes the issues as the action is morally right if a morally upright person would also do in the circumstances. Pertinent issues a student of virtue ethics need to ponder is whether consuming animal meat is a virtuous act or unethical act. Reid (2013) suggests that vegetarianism displays virtue. He postulates that consuming animal meat or using animal products in mean and harmful ways, we fail to showcase character traits that are kind, sensitive, compassionate, mature, and respectable members of an ethical society ought to display. Additionally, Ali (2015) appeals to admirable conceptions of virtue: Searching and deriving satisfaction from products that are gotten from cruel acts reduce one’s admirability.

Essentially, virtue ethics seems to be inclined toward vegetarianism, which the deontology and contract theories strictly oppose. Following the teachings of the fathers of virtue ethics, Aristotle and Plato-virtue ethics should also strive towards moral education, not as the inculcation of rules but rather as training of character. Surprisingly, the issue raised at the start of this essay; whether it is wrong to consume animal meat depends on individuals’ moral convictions.

Part 4: Application of Theory

It is hard to properly map out the virtue ethics as to whether it is wrong to consume animal meat. It becomes apparent that compassion is the key virtue at stake. As far as virtue ethics is concerned, it is an essay to relay that though factory farming is a key source of human food, the production process should be remodeled to make it more humane. Animal advocates decry how animals are treated, terming it ‘fundamentally wrong.’ Though we have to produce sufficient food for humanity, this should not be attained at the suffering of another living creature.

References

Thames B. (2018). How should one live? Lanchina Publishing Services. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/books/Thames.5057.18.1/sections/ch09sec9.1

Ali, K. (2015). Muslims and Meat-Eating. Journal Of Religious Ethics, 43(2), 268-288. doi: 10.1111/jore.12097

Reid, J. (2013). Should we eat meat?: evolution and consequences of modern carnivory. Choice Reviews Online, 51(05), 51-2657-51-2657. doi: 10.5860/choice.51-2657