"Indeed a line must be drawn somewhere. What I am challenging is where the line currently rests. My proposed criteria is that we should minimise the sufferring in the world. Many animals show obvious signs of sufferring, so we should avoid eating them. Plants do not suffer so there is no reason not to eat them.
There will always be borderline cases. I accept that. (e.g. is killing insects ok? maybe, maybe not). But the point is that cows, chickens, pigs and sheep are not borderline cases."
I believe there is a classification error here though. You're assuming that the only manifestation of "suffering" is that of pain. However, the term "suffer" is also used to describe a sustained loss or injury. Plants do get injured, plants do suffer- but only to the point where they are forced to endure a situation that they have no control over. Eating plants causes them to suffer, as they have sustained a physical loss, which by definition, is suffering.
Why do you consider plants incapable of suffering? Or is it that plants don't suffer in a conventional way? Is it suffer the verb or suffer the noun?
|