Opposing meat consumption on metaphysics grounds – that means, just because animals area unit sentient beings, we have a tendency to shouldn’t eat them – separates humans from nature and prevents really moral relationships between humans, animals and also the flora and fauna. The late environmental thinker Val Plumwood coined “ontological veganism” to explain this absolute opposition.
Ontological veganism asserts that beings that count as moral subjects mustn’t be eaten, within the same manner that there’s a widespread taboo regarding consumption humans. whereas this thinking erects another unhelpful boundary between animals and different life forms, it’s conjointly ironic that the explanation underlying taboos against consumption humans are that the need to radically separate humans from different animals.
By framing the consumption of different living beings as AN inherent ethical wrong, metaphysics veganism conjointly risks demonizing predation. so as to avoid this, a typical approach is to “excuse” animal predation by the difference that the latter is an element of “nature” whereas humans, as cultural beings, ought to be exempt.
Some of U.S.A. – particularly those living in loaded countries – will so opt to elect vegetarian product, however, this argument reproduces another false dichotomy: nature vs. culture. Life is web, with no clear boundaries between “humans” and different species, or between “nature” and “society”.