As humans we are sapient beings. We can look into a mirror and recognize our reflection, plan for the future, remember the past, feel emotion, experience mental and physical pain and contemplate our place in the Universe. It is not an arrogant statement to claim that no other animal species has reached our level of consciousness but simply a factual one. One cannot deny that a fully functional and fully grown human adult has more potential to experience the world in a more fulfilling and deep way than any, for example, pig, whale or bonobo. It would seem that this is the beginning of an argument to support the consumption of meat by illustrating the superiority of humanity, but in fact it is the framework that envelops the core of the ethics of vegetarianism: the ability to suffer not just physically but, just as importantly, emotionally and mentally. For the most important fact to understand is that even though humans have the most potential to be happy and to suffer, we are by no means the only animal for this to occur.
Peter Singer says that, “Despite obvious differences between humans and non-human animals, we share a capacity to suffer, and this means that they, like us, have interests”. One of the most important emotions we as humans can experience is empathy for one another. We can experience the suffering of other humans simply by mentally placing ourselves in their situation. Murder is a deplorable act in human society because if one kills another human being one is literally depriving said person from the experiences of the future. All the joy and suffering one may have experienced is supplanted by death. It is not the physical act of dying, although depending on the situation, may cause serious physical pain and emotional distress, that worries most people, it is the sense of not being able to continue to experience life. It is like becoming extremely invested in an enthralling video game only to have it taken away part way through with no chance of playing it again(obviously a bit shallow way to look at it). To be killed is to have the future taken from you.
With that thought in mind, consider how we do not draw distinctions between the pain experienced by a human newborn to the pain experienced by a human adult, even if it is true that the adult may suffer more (according to the stage of development of an individual’s nervous system). If there is suffering, we attempt to end it as much as possible. So why is it that we are so quick to forget the fact that most animals, even fish, and especially mammals, are capable of a diverse range of suffering? Is there any valid reason we choose to kill pigs, cows, chickens and so on for food when there are perfectly reasonable alternatives to meat that do not degrade a human’s nutritional intake? What rationale do we have that permits the horrors of factory farms, slaughter houses and all manner of facilities, devices and methods that are designed for the breeding, raising, storing, killing and processing of animals? Even if we raise animals in the most humane conditions and ensure a painless death we are still unable to defend the killing of a sentient being. For the purpose of consumption, killing animals cannot be ethically justified and it is entirely logically consistent to aim for the least amount of suffering for everyone, regardless of what species they happen to belong to.
Does that seem right to you?
Does that seem right to you?
