Ethics of eating meat

Part of a series on
Animal rights
Overview Animal welfare Around the world History Timeline Animal cruelty Veganism Vegetarianism Primate rights in research
Movement Advocates Vegans Vegetarians Groups
Animal abuse Animal–industrial complex Killing Mutilation Wild animals Consumption Dogs Horses Cats Cattle Eating live seafood Bloodsports Bullfighting Hunting Fishing Animal testing Cosmetic Captivity Zoos Circuses Oceanariums Chick culling Goldfish swallowing Companion animals Puppy mills Abandonment
Ideas Animal ethics Abolitionism Animal protectionism Bambi effect Carnism Personism Sentientism Speciesism
Related topics Cultured meat Environmentalism Radical Deep ecology Humanism Welfarism
Animals portal
v t e

Conversations regarding the ethics of eating meat are focused on whether or not it is moral to eat non-human animals. People who abstain from eating meat are generally known as "vegetarians" and people who avoid all animal by-products are known as “vegans”. They avoid meat for various reasons such as taste preference, animal welfare, ethical reasons, religion, the environmental impact of meat production (environmental vegetarianism), health considerations,^[1] and antimicrobial resistance.^[2] Individuals who promote meat consumption do so for a number of reasons, such as health, cultural traditions, religious beliefs,^[3] and scientific arguments that support the practice.^[4][5]

A common argument used in the animal rights movement is the argument from marginal cases, asserting that non-human animals should have the moral status similar to that of marginal case human beings such as human infants, the senile, the comatose, and the cognitively disabled. Proponents argue that there are no morally relevant traits that these marginal humans possess that animals lack.

In addition to flesh, vegans also abstain from other animal products, such as dairy products, honey and eggs, for similar reasons. "Ethical omnivores" are individuals who object to the practices underlying the production of meat, as opposed to the act of consuming meat itself. In this respect, many people who abstain from certain kinds of meat eating and animal products do not take issue with meat consumption in general, provided that the meat and animal products are produced in a specific manner.^[6] Ethical omnivores may object to rearing animals for meat in factory farms, killing animals in ways that cause pain, and feeding animals unnecessary antibiotics or hormones. To this end, they may avoid meats such as veal, foie gras, meat from animals that were not free range, animals that were fed antibiotics or hormones, etc.^[7]

In a 2014 survey of 406 US philosophy professors, approximately 60% of ethicists and 45% of non-ethicist philosophers said it was at least somewhat "morally bad" to eat meat from mammals.^[8] A 2020 survey of 1,812 published English-language philosophers found that 48% said it was permissible to eat animals in ordinary circumstances, while 45% said it was not.^[9] The World Scientists' Warning to Humanity (2017), the most co-signed scientific journal article in history, called (among other things) for a transition to plant-based diets in order to combat climate change.^[10]