3 ms·
I understand your point, but don't you think that referring to "ethical consequentialist vegetarians" as "consistent vegetarians" or simply "vegetarians" is a b
by pera 10y ago
I understand your point, but don't you think that referring to "ethical consequentialist vegetarians" as "consistent vegetarians" or simply "vegetarians" is a bit dishonest? I'm also a long-term vegetarian and animal rights supporter, same my family and many of my friends; I think I have never met an ethical consequentialist vegetarian in my entire life... I believe this article says more about consequentialism than vegetarianism in "general" (if there is such a thing).
- schoen 10y agoThis article appeared in an academic philosophy journal, so maybe the background expectations there are a bit different. Consequentialism may be a (much?) more widespread position among academic philosophers than among the general public. I agree with your observation and other people's observation here that it doesn't really reflect on "vegetarianism" worldwide, or necessarily meant to. For example, in Singapore I met tons of religious vegetarians who didn't necessarily have any commitments one way or another about these academic debates, and of course in the U.S. there are lots of folks who hope it will help with their weight or cardiovascular health or something.