Ok, here’s a good one to start the ball rolling…
Which of these sentences is correct:
“A vegetarian DOESN’T eat meat.” or
“A vegetarian SHOULDN’T eat meat.”
Please give reasons for your answers.
The question is, does someone who claims to be a vegetarian, cease to be one if they eat a bit of meat by mistake?
That would make the act of eating meat the deciding factor. Therefore all the time you were not eating meat (we can’t eat meat all the time!) you would become a vegetarian. This seems rather nonsensical.
But then if we say a vegetarian can eat meat but shouldn’t then i could carry on eating meat as normal and call myself a vegetarian. Ok, not a very good vegetarian, but nonetheless a vegetarian. But then that makes “being vegetarian” a meaningless phrase surely?
responses?
I don’t think in all honesty its terribly complicated !! A vegetarian does not eat meat…and a vegetarian should not eat meat !! Its all to do with intention…!! If a vegetarian eats a bit of meat accidently then that doesn’t neccesarily make him omnivorous simply because of that one mistake, in order to be a vegetarian he has to make a conscious decision to be it or not to be it !! If he chooses to be it and deliberately eats meat then he is NOT a vegetarian !!! Any problems ?!
a vegetarian is someone who calls themself a vegetarian. other than that, there seems to be no reasonable way to define them. some choose to be veges, some have to because of religion or other social influences. these are two very different reasons for being a vege, so how can you try and define it? if you call yourself a vege, you are one. end of story. if you then eat meat accidentally, you were either lying or you’ve got no self-discipline. on the other hand, its easier for others because they simply don’t like meat. so my friends, the only definition is if you call yourself a vegetarian. (in my opinion)
silly debate
(come home, ben) xxxxx
ben, is the reason theres nothing on any actual philosophers on this site because philosophy is about thinking, not about learning? if so, fab. if not, why not?
(please?) xxxxx
I think i’d agree with you that it is a rather silly topic but always a good one to start off with 
The reason there is nothing on actual philosophers at the moment is because the “philosophers index” page is still under construction. I’m hoping to have information on the actual philosophers as well as their theories. I just haven’t got round to it yet 
(i’m home xxx)
What’s going on,
I’m trying out these small discussions before I can even attempt the larger ones. My opinion at this moment is that a vegetarian is just a label we impose on ourselves. It is an aspiration. One can never truly be a vegetarian, because we are all in a state of flux, forever changing. So when someone could say they are a vegetarian, that might be true, for that moment in time. But one can not truly say they are until their entire life has passed and can say they never ate meat.
It is sort of like trying to prove one isn’t a homosexual. I’m not a homosexual because I am going to have sex with a female tonight. You could only prove being homosexual, but you can’t prove not being homosexual. A vegetarian shouldn’t eat meat because the word means that they don’t. But being a vegetarian is just the abscence of meat. Being heterosexual is just the abscence of sex with the same sex.
Maybe not so, but that is the only analogy I can devise. Hope this wasn’t a pure waste of your reading time.
— I am a vegetarian for ethical reasons. I don’t like causing pain to animals and consuming meat is a poor use of the earth’s resources. If i go into Denny’s and order a boca burger (meatless soy patty) and the waitress brings me a regular burger that was cooked by mistake i will not save an animal’s life by refusing to eat it. From a consequentialist perspective i have fulfilled my intention of not causing pain to animals whether i eat the dead cow or not. Along the same lines, some buddhist monks will not eat meat that was specifically prepared for them but will consume it otherwise. Also, if i have fish in my freezer from my pre-vegetarian days that i have been unable to divest myself of, i will in no way, save any fish by not eating them, the damage has already been done.
— I don’t think taking a rational, ethical position such as vegetarianism and making it dogma (Thou shall not eat meat) adds any ethical import, the important thing is to keep ones intentions and realize one’s expected consequences.
Marshall McDaniel,
::APPLAUSE::
My hands come together for that one. I’ve never looked at it that way. Being a vegetarian, well at least for you, is an ethical position. And you wouldn’t mind eating meat, since your whole point of veiw is that you don’t want an animal to sufffer. But if it’s too late… that’s good stuff.
— Thanks Smooth, i got the idea from Peter Singer but the personal application has been in my own life. At first i gave up pork and beef and later everything but fish, it was a hell of a lot easier and more enjoyable than quitting smoking and i don’t miss the meat at all the way i do cigarettes, and it’s healthier.
hold on Mr. McDaniel, did you just say that not eating meat is healthier than not smoking?
— No! Please pardon that syntactical ambiguity! Kinda like saying, “Eat at Joes, where the finest food is served by waitresses in appetizing forms.” (which is appetizing? The food or waitresses?). I who have just stated elsewhere today that you learn to use careful phrasing in the threads of this philosophy loom. I meant that being a vegetarian is healthier than not being a vegetarian. I like you smooth, you keep me on my toes.
Vegetarians don’t eat meat, because of their personal convictions, like Marshall McDaniel!
But I’ve also seen some really unpleasant examples of vegetarians. For example 3 girls from my class. Once we were celebrating the ending of school and we had a large talbe with food and as I wanted to get some meat, they started like :“Hey Mary, I hope you’re not going to eat that dead cow. It was killed so brutally […]!” Well, after that all I didn’t want to eat anything at all. But if we don’t cause any pain to animals, we cause pain to plants.
Saving animals is a nice thing, but there are many other ways apart from refusing to eat meat. Well, as jew, I don’t eat pork. But not that I was so scrictly religious. I don’t eat the meat by chance 
xplict^ stated:
It depends does it not? You should talk to some of the vegans I know (although a vegan is not a vegetarian).
As for causing plants pain, they do not show the physical action as animals do. Humans cant help but to see the similarities between animal suffering and human suffering…
obscure_reality:
Well, it’s not only my opinion. That’s what I’ve heard from our so called “vegetarians”. I am not one myself, that is why I can’t tell you if is it really so or not. I can only assume.
To each their own / Whatever floats your boat
I love meat. Live by it. But I honor and respect a person who lives their life the way they want to. It isn’t up to me to impose my customs, beliefs, habits, and hobbies on someone else. And I know I might take this to a weird turn, but all life is suffering. Yeah poor cows, but I take pleasure in eating meat. I don’t want to feel guilty after eating a hamburger. And to be honest, if it were all of us alone on top of a mountain for weeks, . . . I’ll eat all of you before you eat, or don’t eat, me!
kind of nasty.
Hopefully I never have to eat a human. I don’t think we taste all that well. When was the last time you smelled sex? Weird scent.
— xplicit^. Even if it were true that plants can feel pain, it would still make ethical sense to be a vegetarian due to the fact that one kills ten times as many plants by raising and eating the animal that consumed them. The argument for vegetarianism thus holds true in both realms. I don’t try to flaunt it and i don’t really advocate it; It does seem to me, though, that we are separated from the consequences of our actions to a great degree. We now fight wars with the touch of a button instead of watching the blood spurt from our hapless decapitated foe, for example.
Vegitarians have made a choice, it is not a disbility.
Ask yourself this, a person with peanut allergies avoids peanut, or a person with peanut allergies should avoid peanuts. To avoid the peanuts is a choice, they hould because if the don’t they’ll die. A vegitarian doesn’t eat meat because it is their choice, wieth they should or shouldn’t has no relivance, uless you want to evalute the quality of the vegitarian’s dedication.
BigShot stated:
As for vegetarianism not being a disability, i was merely trying to point out (when i say, “I don’t try to flaunt it and i don’t really advocate it;”) that i am not the kind that says
I try to respect the opinions of others, and i am not one to proselytize needlessly.
Could you please explain, “whether they should or not has no relevance.”? My lights say that it has a lot of relevance. I just saw a dog get hit by a vehicle today. I know what pain feels like. I can imagine that animal’s suffering, and our species habitually maims, kills, and eradicates more intelligent animals than dogs (including ourselves). In addition the further advent of capitalism has necessitated the use of high-output animal farms. Countless numbers of chickens, for example, are abandoned in small cages which lack the necessary room to stretch their wings. They aren’t able to go through the normal pecking order so they constantly squabble. In response to these “vices”, the farmers leave the lights off for the majority of the day, they debeak them (the feeling would be like someone ripping out all of your fingernails at once). Young cows are denied iron and deliberately kept anemic just so the meat will have the proper color for the consumer. Pigs are forced to reproduce at three times the natural rate. It is estimated that it takes 2500 gallons of water to produce a pound of beef (not to mention the grain), and water is hard to come by in some places.
Incidentally, philosophers like Leibniz and Descartes have done little to promote animal welfare, for instance, Leibniz argued that animals don’t feel pain like we do.
The original question was:
In typical American pragmatic fashion (Even though the British excel at animal rights and i am not a pragmatist) i refuse to give a universal answer. I will only say that i avoid eating meat, and i will not eat it insofar as my actions cause or could cause the death of a sentient being.
I do this because
1.) I do not want animals to die or experience pain.
2.) In a world where a billion people lack the basic necessities (food, clothing, shelter) i refuse to directly cause the consumption of more grain.
3.) It’s healthier.
Marshall McDaniel:
I truly respect your attitude and I am not trying to add any negative aspects. It is a personal decission of everyone to eat meat or not. At the moment I am thinking about it very seriously and collectiong arguments, but I am not going to preach the fact that eating meat is healthy. It’s up to you.