The Moral Imperative to Eat Meat


This essay attempts to answer age-old questions about how the consumption of animals fits into our moral framework. Do animals suffer, and if so, does their suffering have any moral relevance? Is it immoral to eat meat, or immoral not to? What is the religious significance of butter? Should we be eating other primates?

Perhaps Rene Descartes was right when he made the compelling argument that animals don’t feel pain. After all, he was right about a lot of other stuff.

Descartes was a vegetarian for health reasons. He, did, however, skin dogs and rabbits alive for research purposes. He reasoned that if the animals felt pain then what was done to them would be so horrific that God would never allow it. Since God did, in fact, allow it, then it follows logically that dogs and rabbits don’t feel pain. There is no reason to think any other animals do, either. As Descartes went on to argue, animals don’t have souls, and without a soul, you can’t feel pain.

At this point you may be thinking, that only makes sense if there really is a God. How do we know God exists? Descartes proved that, too.

It should be noted that there are currents of religious thought which teach that the more intelligent animals do have souls. But even if this is true, just because an animal has a soul, that doesn’t mean she feels pain. It’s more likely that the complex neurochemical pathways which underlie pain perception that we share with nonhuman animals are a coincidence, and that they have an entirely different function in all nonhuman animals, not just the less intelligent ones who have no souls.

But even if animals do feel pain, does it matter? Let’s examine the issue from the perspectives of secular and religious morality.

Why Meat is Moral

Refraining from eating the flesh of animals would be unreasonable because it would be putting animals’ trivial interests in their own lives above our greater interest in eating them. After all, meat tastes really good. It’s such a treasured part of the diet that in some languages, the word for meal is “meat.”

There are some who would claim that if our actions cause the suffering of other sentient beings that is a strong reason not to do it. Libertarian philosopher Jan Narveson has powerfully refuted this claim and points out that the suffering caused to sentient nonhumans by humans is “counterbalanced by the fact that it is very much in our interests to do it.”

In a nutshell, “the question is, is our interest in the taste of animal flesh such as to justify doing the things we do to them to get them into the frying pan? My answer is, yes.” He goes on to explain, “We don’t need to justify our treatment of animals by claiming that they are in some serious sense necessary, like we would die if we didn’t eat animals. That’s not necessary at all. The fact is, if you like meat, then you’re justified in killing animals for the sake of eating meat.”

Even Peter Singer, father of the animal rights movement, acknowledges that animals have no interest in continuing to live. Of course, Singer is a nut who gives most of his own money away to poor people he’s never met, and he thinks the kind of lives animals have is important. He argues that animals have an interest in the quality of their own lives.

That may be true, just as humans have an interest in the quality of their own lives. But that doesn’t mean we should refrain from having children just because our children will suffer during their lifetimes. Life has intrinsic value. Even most humans who are deeply unhappy have the desire to go on living and do not wish they had never been born. Why should animals be any different?

If people stopped eating meat, then fewer animals would be born. As eminent economist Robin Hanson so eloquently stated in his Meat is Moral essay, by eating meat “you are not hurting animals; you are helping them.”

He points out that “we might well agree that wild pigs have lives more worth living, per day at least, just as humans may be happier in the wild instead of fighting traffic to work in a cubical all day. But even these human lives are worth living, and it is my judgment that most farm animal’s lives are worth living too. Most farm animals prefer living to dying; they do not want to commit suicide.”

Hanson explains that the more animals we eat, the more animals will be born to replace them. If we stop eating meat then those animals will never get to have a life at all. Since life on a factory farm is better than no life at all, meat is moral.

This doesn’t mean, of course, that we shouldn’t care at all about improving their lives. It is kind of us to do things that improve the lives of others, whether they be humans or animals, but it is not immoral not to. As Hanson put it, “It would be kind of you to pay a little more for your meat to improve the lives of the animals that become your meat. Just don’t confuse a lack of extra kindness with cruelty; people already do more good by buying ordinary meat than by buying veggies.”

Religious Morality

Perhaps you reject secular ethics. What, then, compels us to support the meat industry on religious grounds? All the holy books in the Western tradition advocate the eating of meat, and God explicitly gave humans dominion over animals. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, Descartes proved that God exists and thereby established that animals don’t feel pain.

The authority of the holy books and the scientific proofs of Descartes will be sufficient for most people. But you may still have nagging doubts, or you may be one of a growing number of people who believes the Vedas offer a much better explanation of how the universe works. Quantum mechanics and superstring theorists are just now starting to discover all the things that were explained thousands of years ago in the Vedic scriptures.

People who follow the Vedas are vegetarians, but they eat a lot of dairy products, especially butter and ghee. One of the important tenets of their religion is nonviolence, so one day I asked them why they supported the dairy industry when the use of animals on dairy farms meets their definition of violence. They explained to me that if butter and ghee are properly blessed, they contain no karmic taint. The prohibition against violence is there only to help people avoid bad karma. But anything desired by Krishna and prepared with the proper rituals can have no negative karma no matter how it is procured.

“Why is that?” I asked. They just laughed at my naivete and told me that was how the universe is structured. Then they told me a charming story about Krishna as a child. Apparently he was very fond of butter and naughtly little Krishna used to sneak into the kitchen through a window to steal butter. One of his common nicknames is “the butter thief.” Apparently He is just as fond of it now.

What does this have to do with the morality of meat? No matter how many hormones you inject into cows and how sophisticated your milking machinery, the truth is that milk cannot be produced without producing lots and lots of calves. And farmers cannot just produce calves that go to waste. They must be able to cut them up and sell them. Farmers are not philanthropists, after all. They have to make a living. Lord Krishna wants butter, and without the meat industry, the dairy industry would dry up, Krishna would become unhappy, the universal dharmic order would be imbalanced and the whole structure of the universe would become deranged .

Now that we’ve established the moral necessity of supporting the meat industry, a few criticisms are in order.

A Few Words on the Inefficiencies of the Leather and Fur Industries

In order to maximize the contributions of the meat industry to human happiness, there are some inefficiencies in the leather and fur industries that should be addressed. Leather and fur are treated as commodities in their own right, and the flesh of the animals stripped of their skin and fur frequently goes to waste. To just throw the corpses into a pile and let them rot after we’ve stripped their skins is unethical. We should make full use of the animals in an attempt to create the maximum amount of human happiness we can from each animal.

Weak Arguments in Support of Eating Meat Should Be Abandoned

In order to be effective in our arguments, we must be careful to weed out any weak arguments, even if they are intuitively appealing. One such argument is that we need to eat meat in order to be healthy. It can be challenging to overcome such deeply ingrained thought patterns. But is has been acknowledged by the USDA and the ADA that a vegan diet can be healthy. We don’t want to use arguments that our opponents can effectively refute. If they defeat us on even a minor point such as this, it will give them some credibility, and they may use that to confuse the uninformed. Unsophisticated thinkers are easily swayed and may not realize that even though it’s healthy to be vegan, it is immoral.

The argument that I find most irksome is the one that it’s natural to eat meat. That just doesn’t hold any water. Murder and rape are also natural. Just because it’s natural does not mean that it is good or moral. After all, chimpanzees eat monkeys. Chimpanzees are our closest relatives, and we are theirs. But that doesn’t mean we should start eating our fellow primates. That would be ridiculous. It’s a health hazard to eat such closely related animals and it would also be in poor taste. Chimpanzees clearly have a lot to learn about common sense and morality.

We must bear in mind that we are superior as a species because of our ability to rise above our instincts and formulate morally coherent systems of thought. True compassion is knowing your place on the food chain.*

Every year, the number of animals bred for food in the U.S. increases by the hundreds of thousands. Let’s keep up the good work.

* @ngaulin on Twitter

Bookmark and Share

29 Responses to “The Moral Imperative to Eat Meat”

  • Foodeater Says:

    Well done! “Every year, the number of animals bred for food in the U.S. increases by the hundreds of thousands. Let’s keep up the good work.” I am laughing so hard right now, while shaking my head at the sad irony of it all. Being able to approach all this with a sense of humor helps to take the edge off. Thanks again for writing this. I just submitted it to Stumble Upon, it deserves a wider audience :)


  • Lindsey Says:

    Wow, this is great! You are so well-read on the philosophical opposition!
    What’s up with Descartes? Is he really that much of a moron to think that God doesn’t allow animals to feel pain? Hmm, I guess whatever massive amounts of human suffering going on at the time really didn’t qualify as suffering either because “God” wouldn’t have allowed it to happen. I’ve completely lost respect for him.


  • Leafy Says:

    @foodeater: Thanks! I almost didn’t write it because the subject is so not funny. I wasn’t sure I wanted to “take the edge” off with humor.

    But I did manage to offend some people — I lost followers on Twitter after I posted a link to this. That’s something, I guess. ;-)

    @Lindsey: It’s hard to imagine, isn’t it? But at least Descartes acknowledged that it would not be okay to torture animals if they felt pain. Modern anti-AR philosophers take the position that, sure, animals suffer, but it just doesn’t matter that much if we humans get something out of it. Narveson even thinks it’s not a big deal if animals are tortured for no reason.


  • Lindsey Says:

    That’s very true. Descartes is more forgivable then. Narveson’s the real fool here. Even millions of people who love to eat meat wouldn’t necessarily agree that it’s right to make animals suffer just for fun.
    By the way, it’s awesome you wrote this, since I didn’t cover any of these deeper, philosophical reasons for eating meat in my sarcastic post.


  • Edward Says:

    You are a genius Leafy! What an honor it is to have you writing here!


  • Lindsey Says:

    Agreed. Great stuff!


  • Foodeater Says:

    Most of my best work usually loses me the most followers ;)


  • Emely Wilds Says:

    ren̩ descartes is definitely the most genius man that ever lived! we think Рtherefore we are ;-)


  • Jaycee Says:

    I bow down humbly in the prsenece of such greatness.


  • Gatsy Says:

    Thanks for sharnig. What a pleasure to read!


  • Monique Says:

    Would laugh if I wasn’t so shell shocked, and relieved.
    I was seriously contemplating if this was a joke or if this person was serious – how could anyone think that way?
    Anyways, very good article – love the sarcasm,. though it seriously scared me for a good few minutes there, :D


  • Huge Melons Says:

    Hi folks, I discovered your weblog on my online directory site, i have to claim your blog looks great! Have a nice day!!


  • Messy Creampie Says:

    Hey there pretty nice blog man, amazing, everything is good style themes, i’ll bookmark and subscribe for the feeds!


  • CBT Extreme Says:

    Exceptional internet site! I’m loving it! I’ll appear back again for sure!!


  • Jeanene Duston Says:

    You will need to trust on your own . That’s the secret involving achievement.


  • Burberry Check Scarf Says:

    Hello there, possibly this isn’t in issue however anyhow, appears exploring with regards to your internet site and it appears to be fabulous. figure out that you’re fervent I’m just constructing a brand-new blog site and battling recover bode well, and give superb content. I’ve got discovered a lot for your internet site and that i count on far more improvements and will also be back again.


  • guide to healthy diet Says:

    Excellent post. I was checking continuously this blog and I’m impressed! Very helpful information specifically the last part I care for such info much. I was seeking this particular information for a long time. Thank you and good luck.


  • Juicy Couture Handbags Says:

    Juicy Couture Handbags…

    […]The Moral Imperative to Eat Meat | Veganise Me[…]…

  • Says:

    Thanks for any other fantastic article. The place else may just anybody get that type of info in such an ideal method of writing? I’ve a presentation next week, and I am at the search for such information.


  • Andrew Says:

    great points altogether, you just gained a new reader. What could you suggest about your post that you simply made a few days ago? Any positive?


  • Darmowe programy Says:

    Howdy! I just wish to offer you a big thumbs up for the excellent information you’ve got right here on this post. I will be returning to your web site for more soon.



    Champ Cars also use non-grooved tires, and they are allowed to incorporate
    a set of softer compound wheels, providing them with an edge over other cars, making the outcome of the race less predictable.
    The Audi connect online system turns the car into a Wi – Fi hotspot, allowing connection of
    mobile devices. However in 2012 Indy – Car competitors will have the
    exciting opportunity to choose an Indy – Car with
    a Lotus engine and aero body kit, immediately become part of a legacy that is Lotus: one of the most innovative
    and successful sports and racing car brands in the world.


  • Says:

    Made of wool with regard to Ambiance around CoatsWool not to mention affordable are frequent elements with regard to constructing toasty cold months jackets.


  • hotspot wifi Says:

    Typically I wouldn’t study submit in weblogs, even so would choose to claim that this particular write-up very compelled us to look at and also apply it! Your own way with words may be pleasantly surprised my family.. hotspot wifi Thank you, quite good post.


  • Says:

    It’s the job of the WEBSITE POSITIONING to keep you knowledgeable
    of something related to your campaign. If
    you happen to feel they maintain making the identical recommendations over
    and over, seek understanding, and permit this new insight to guide your current

    Visit my page: MagicSubmitter Review, Buy MagicSubmitter, Magic Submitter Scam?



  • nba 2k16 mt Says:

    Sustain the spectacular work !! Lovin’ it!|


  • example Says:

    Hi to every one, it’s actually a pleasant for me to pay
    a quick visit this website, it consists
    of important Information.


  • men Vests Says:

    you’re in point of fact a good webmaster. The website loading pace is incredible.
    It seems that you’re doing any distinctive trick.
    Also, The contents are masterpiece. you have performed a magnificent
    process on this subject!


  • Truth's Fire Says:

    As creatures scream out and writhe in pain, possessing central nervous systems IDENTICAL to that of a human by all scientific considerations, nerves firing off from the abuses inflicted on them by wanton and deranged mentality that enables sociopathic behaviour. Descartes argument was that he got away with it, therefore it was moral. That argument is so morally abhorrent it doesn’t even merit a response.

    Here’s the FACTS. Science has agreed that Descartes was WRONG. Animals feel pain because they have a brain and central nervous system that is wired with pain receptors. Furthermore, their behaviours to pain stimuli are IDENTICAL to that of humans.

    None of you here have ANY PEER-REVIEWED science to back up your sociopathic and outdated notions promoting pain and suffering on par with the most infamous holocaust. Veganism is rising faster than ever. You can’t stop the truth.


Leave a Reply