Please boost your Plan to download papers
Puppies, Pigs, and People eating meat and marginal cases - Essay Example
Author : lou56
Pages 5 (1255 words)
This paper is a discussion of two arguments based on the article, “Puppies, Pigs and People eating meat and marginal cases”. This paper has strived to show that it is hard to deny the fact that eating factory-sourced meat and the torturing of puppies for gustatory pleasure are morally equivalent…
In his creative and provocative paper Norcross contends that there is no need for humans to continue consuming factory-farmed meat. He starts his article by giving an example of the fictional Fred and the quest for a chemical that will allow him to have the gustatory experience, akin to that of tasting chocolate. Unfortunately, Cocoamone can only be retrieved from the brain of an abused puppy following prolonged torture and an excruciating death. Just as one would condemn an individual who carries out this sort of treatment on puppies, so we should also condemn those who derive gustatory pleasure from the consumption of factory-farmed animals. The author gives some differences between Fred and an average consumer of meat, as well as possible defenses that one could use to justify their meat eating habits as being different to Fred’s fetish. He follows each of this method of reasoning with an objection. The first difference that he brings along has to do with the fact that Fred does the torturing himself while a majority of Americans consume meat from creatures tortured by others. His second difference is that most consumers are not aware of the treatment meted out on these animals before they get to the supermarket. His first defense of the carnivore is that even if the individual did not consume or buy the factory-farmed meat, the animals would not be spared a life of cruelty. Agri-business is a vast market and changes to the eating habits of one individual cannot cause much of a difference. ...