A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism

Is vegetarianism morally defensible? Can one even be a vegetarian? This book asserts that the answers to both these questions is a resounding 'no.' Drawing on the latest research in plant science, systems ecology, environmental philosophy, and cultural anthropology, Andrew F. Smith--himself a long-time vegetarian--shatters the distinction between vegetarianism and omnivorism. He explains how the world would be better off if we could re-orient the way we think about plants, animals, and the moral reasoning that we use to bolster our belief in such a binary. Smith illustrates how the divisions we have constructed between plants and animals, and between omnivorism and vegetarianism, is emblematic of a way of thinking about ourselves and our eating practices that perpetuates an ecocidal worldview. A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism insists we must adopt new ways of looking at things if our species is to survive and thrive. Smith suggests we begin by re-envisioning our relationship with our food. It turns out we are not what we eat, but who we eat. And this makes a world of difference Drawing on research in plant science, systems ecology, environmental philosophy, and cultural anthropology, Andrew F. Smith shatters the distinction between vegetarianism and omnivorism. The book outlines the implications that these manufactured distinctions have for how we view food and ourselves as eaters. 1. Unsettling Questions2. Plant Sentience3. Animism4. The Closed Loop5. Two Objections, One Accommodation6. Loose EndsBibliography