Skip to main content
Log in

Is Animal Suffering Really All That Matters? The Move from Suffering to Vegetarianism

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The animal liberation movement, among other goals, seeks an end to the use of animals for food. The philosophers who started the movement agree on the goal but differ in their approach: deontologists argue that rearing animals for food infringes animals’ inherent right to life. Utilitarians claim that ending the use of animals for food will result in the maximization of utility. Virtue-oriented theorists argue that using animals for food is callus, self-indulgent, and unjust, in short, it’s an unvirtuous practice. Despite their different approaches, arguments for vegetarianism or veganism have a common step. They move from the notion of suffering to the conclusion of vegetarianism or veganism. In this paper I suggest that the notion of animal suffering is not necessary in order to condemn the practice of animal farming. I propose the possibility of defending vegetarianism or veganism on the basis of arguments that do not rest on the notion of animal suffering, but rather rely on aesthetic principles, the avoidance of violence, and preservation of the environment, and health.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. C. (2015). The sexual politics of meat: A feminist-vegetarian critical theory. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Alvaro, C. (2019). Ethical veganism, virtue ethics, and the great soul. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. C., & Barrett, L. F. (2016). Affective beliefs influence the experience of eating meat. PLoS ONE, 11(8), e0160424. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Animal Kill Clock. (2019). https://animalclock.org. Accessed 15 Oct 2018.

  • Aquinas, T. (2016). Summa contra gentiles (Pegis, A. Trans.). University of Notre Dame Press (1st edn., 1975).

  • Bouvard, V., Loomis, D., Guyton, K. Z., Grosse, Y., Ghissassi, F. E., Benbrahim-Tallaa, L., et al. (2015). Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat. The Lancet Oncology, 16(16), 1599–1600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carus, F. (2010). UN urges global move to meat and dairy-free diet. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet. Accessed 21 April 2019.

  • Chapman, H. A., & Anderson, A. K. (2014). Trait physical disgust is related to moral judgments outside of the purity domain. Emotion, 14(2), 341–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLonge, M. (2018). Ask a scientist Union of concerned scientists, how does pollution from animal agriculture compare to vehicle pollution? Retrieved from https://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/ucs-publications/animal-agriculture#.XFs_JC2ZPOQ. Accessed 18 April 2019.

  • Donovan, J. (2006). Feminism and the treatment of animals: From care to dialogue. Signs, 31(2), 305–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francione, G. L. (1996). Rain without thunder: Ideology of the animal rights movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdier, A. G. (2016). The pig’s squeak: Towards a renewed aesthetic argument for veganism. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 29(4), 631–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hursthouse, R. (2006). Applying virtue ethics to our treatment of other animals. In J. W. Jennifer (Ed.), The practice of virtue: Classic and contemporary readings in virtue ethics. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joy, M. (2011). Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows: An introduction to carnism. San Francisco: Conari Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant I. (1963). Lectures on ethics (Infield, L. Trans.) Harper and Row.

  • Kazez, J. (2018). The taste question in animal ethics. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 35(4), 661–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuehn, G. (2004). Dining on Fido: Death identity, and the aesthetic dilemma of eating animals. In E. McKenna & A. Light (Eds.), Animal pragmatism: Rethinking human-nonhuman relationships (pp. 228–247). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunst, J. R., & Hohle, S. M. (2016). Meat eaters by dissociation: How we present, prepare and talk about meat increases willingness to eat meat by reducing empathy and disgust. Appetite, 105, 758–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.07.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lomasky, L. (2013). Is it wrong to eat animals? Social Philosophy and Policy, 30(1–2):177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke, B. (1992) Justice, caring, and animal liberation. Between the Species, 8(2), Article 13.

  • Midgley, M. (2000). Biotechnology and monstrosity: Why we should pay attention to the "yuk factor". Hastings Center Report, 30(5), 7–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pachirat, T. (2011). Every twelve seconds: Industrialized slaughter and the politics of sight. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel, D., & Pimentel, M. (2003). Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based diets and the environment. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 78(3), 660S–663S. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/78.3.660S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rachels, J. (1990). Created from animals: The moral implications of Darwinism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, R. (1974). Speciesism: The ethics of vivisection. Edinburgh: Scottish Society for the Prevention of Vivisection.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, R. (1989). Animal revolution: Changing attitudes towards speciesism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, R. (1999). Painism: Some moral rules for the civilized experimenter. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 8, 34–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, R. (2003). Painism: A modern morality. London: Open Gate Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, R. (2010). Painism. In M. Bekoff (Ed.), Encyclopedia of animal rights and animal welfare (pp. 402–403). Santa Barbara, Cal. [etc.]: Greenwood Press, imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC.

  • Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals. New York: Avon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1989). All animals are equal. In T. Regan & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal rights and human obligations (pp. 215–226). Oxford University Press.

  • Tantamango, B. (2012). Vegetarian diets and the incidence of cancer in a low-risk population. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 22(2), 286–294. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-12-1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, B. (2013). The triple whopper environmental impact of global meat production. Time. Retrieved from http://science.time.com/2013/12/16/the-triple-whopper-environmental-impact-of-global-meat-production/. Accessed 19 April 2019.

  • Watts, S. (2018). First they tortured animals, then they turned to humans. A&E. Retrieved from https://www.aetv.com/real-crime/first-they-tortured-animals-then-they-turned-to-humans. Accessed 21 April 2019.

  • Wood, W. A. (2008). Kantian ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. (2007). Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer: A global perspective. Washington, DC: AICR. Retrieved from http://www.aicr.org/assets/docs/pdf/reports/Second_Expert_Report.pdf. Accessed 28 May 2019.

  • Women Champion Peace & Justice through Nonviolence. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.library.georgetown.edu/exhibition/women-champion-peace-justice-through-nonviolence.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Malaika, George, Valentina, Jon, and Tyler Perkins for their help in the final draft of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Alvaro.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alvaro, C. Is Animal Suffering Really All That Matters? The Move from Suffering to Vegetarianism. J Agric Environ Ethics 32, 633–645 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-019-09793-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-019-09793-0

Keywords

Navigation