Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

‘Pass the Cocoamone, Please’

Causal Impotence, Opportunistic Vegetarianism and Act-Utilitarianism

Bibliographic Data

ID23201715
AuthorsJohn Richard Harris (Texas Christian University), Richard Galvin (Texas Christian University)
Year2012
Volume15
Issue3
Pages368-383
Publication date2012-10-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEthics, Policy & Environment (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2155-0085 • E-ISSN: 2155-0093
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/21550085.2012.730258
OpenAlexW2153771781
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited7

It appears that utilitarian arguments in favor of moral vegetarianism cannot justify a complete prohibition of eating meat. This is because, in certain circumstances, forgoing meat will prevent no pain, and so, on utilitarian grounds, we should be opportunistic carnivores rather than moral vegetarians. In his paper, ‘Puppies, pigs, and people: Eating meat and marginal cases,’ Alastair Norcross argues that causal impotence arguments like these are misguided. First, he presents an analogous situation, the case of chocolate mousse a-la-bama, in order to argue that we, individually, are not causally impotent. Second, Norcross offers a threshold argument in which he argues that while we may individually be causally impotent, when we adopt moral vegetarianism in concert with others, we become causally potent in preventing harms by factory farming. We argue that Norcross's responses ultimately fail to address the causal impotence objection. The former argument fails because it vastly oversimplifies the world in which we find ourselves. Given the size of factory farming, the reasonable conclusion is that we are in fact powerless to prevent harms to animals in factory farms in many or most cases. The latter argument fails because even if collective action will have an impact on factory farming, this does not provide us with an argument against being carnivores in certain circumstances.

Political science · Utilitarianism · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Property Rights and Legal Doctrine · Psychology

  • Meat Eating and Moral Responsibility

    Open Access•Carolyn Abbate•Utilitas•2020

  • Friends, food or worth fighting for? A proposed stereotype content model for nonhuman animals

    Open Access•Paul Victor Patinadan, Denise B Dillon•Human-Animal Interactions•2022

  • Veganism as political solidarity

    Open Access•Alasdair Cochrane, Mara‐Daria Cojocaru•Journal of Social Philosophy•2023

  • Counting Your Chickens

    Yoaav Isaacs, Adam Lerner et al.•Australasian Journal of Philosophy•2024

  • Industrial Farm Animal Production

    Open Access•John Rossi, Samual Garner et al.•Journal of Agricultural and…•2014

  • Industrial Farming is Not Cruel to Animals

    Open Access•Timothy Hsiao•Journal of Agricultural and…•2017

  • In Defense of the Basic Argument for Vegetarianism

    James Simpson•Journal of Animal Ethics•2021

  • The Case For Animal Rights

    Tom Regan, M W Fox•Advances in Animal Welfare…•1987

  • Reasons and Persons

    Derek Parfit•Reasons and persons•1986

  • Puppies, Pigs, and People

    Open Access•Alastair Norcro•Philosophical Perspectives•2004

  • Is Metaethics Morally Neutral

    Open Access•Jeremy Fantl•Pacific philosophical quarterly•2006

  • Do I Make a Difference

    Open Access•Shelly Kagan•Philosophy & Public Affairs•2011

Unique citing works7
Citations per year0,58
Citation span2014 - 2024 (11)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 6

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae