Should We Be Vegetarians?

In this paper I will look at the argument made by James Rachels in his paper, The Moral Argument for Vegetarianism supporting the view that humans should be vegetarians on moral grounds. I will first outline the basis of Rachels’ argument supporting vegetarianism and his moral objection to using animals as a food source and critique whether it is a good argument. Secondly, I will look at some critiques of this kind of moral argument presented by R. G. Frey in his article, Moral Vegetarianism and the Argument from Pain and Suffering. Finally, I will show why I support the argument made by Frey and why I feel it is the stronger of the two arguments and why I support it.

The primary focus of Rachels’ argument rests on the idea that humans should not eat animals on moral grounds because of the suffering animals endure, as he states, “The most powerful argument appeals to the principle that it is wrong to cause unnecessary suffering.” (Rachels, 2013, p. 617) Rachels argues the attitude of many philosophers that animals are merely means to an end for humans, and that as a food source, animals are owed no direct moral consideration.(Rachels, 2013, p. 617) Rachels also subscribes to a theory revolving around the biographical life versus the biological life of beings. According to Rachels, it would appear per his argument to consume animals if they did not have a clearly defined biographical life. That is, according to Rachels, a life filled with some sort of meaningful inputs and connections. (Rachels, 2013, p. 620) Rachels suggests that a clear distinction can in fact be drawn between just being alive, a biological life, and having a life, a biographical life. I believe that this is an area in which Rachels' argument can be found...

... middle of paper ...

...e with feelings, emotions, or actual pain and suffering, we can only speculate what animals feel, just as we cannot actually feel even what another human feels or experiences, each on in unique and individual. What can be said, is that arguments can be presented in support of either eating meat or not, but I feel that at least in this particular case, Rachels’ argument is on the weak side and I believe is easily countered by Frey’s argument.

Works Cited

Frey, R. (2013). Moral Vegetarianism and the Argument from Pain and Suffering. In L. Vaughn, Contemporary Moral Arguments - Readings in Ethical Issues Second Edition (pp. 622-627). New York: Oxford University Press.

Rachels, J. (2013). The Moral Argument for Vegetarianism. In L. Vaughn, Contemporary Moral Arguments - Readings in Ethical Issues Second Edition (pp. 617-622). New York: Oxford University Press.