Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Animal rights writer Henry S. Salt termed the replaceability argument the "logic of the larder".. In 1789, the utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham endorsed a variant of the argument, contending that painlessly killing a nonhuman animal is beneficial for everyone because it does not harm the animal and the consumers of the meat produced from the animal's body are better off as a result.
Negative utilitarianism is a form of negative consequentialism that can be described as the view that people should minimize the total amount of aggregate suffering, or that they should minimize suffering and then, secondarily, maximize the total amount of happiness.
His 2019 book, Dialogues on Ethical Vegetarianism, is a series of dialogues on the ethics of eating meat. Peter Singer, who wrote the foreword to the book, commented that "In the future, when people ask me why I don't eat meat, I will tell them to read this book." [17] [18]
In ethical philosophy, utilitarianism is a family of normative ethical theories that prescribe actions that maximize happiness and well-being for the affected individuals. [1] [2] In other words, utilitarian ideas encourage actions that lead to the greatest good for the greatest number.
The book has been used to reconcile utilitarian and rules-based ethics. [25] Humanist psychologists have used the book to explain why only proven phenomena is needed to prove why morality exists, and what the parameters of morality should be. [26] Theists have commented on the way the book grounds ethics without recourse to religion. [27]
When it comes to fat loss, one thing is for certain: what you eat matters. However, many people wrongly believe that some nutritious foods are “bad”—pasta, nuts and even fruit are often ...
Diet also has an important role to play in maintaining healthy levels of iron in the body. “Some people may eat a diet that has actually very little iron to be available for the body to absorb ...
The central argument of the book is an expansion of the utilitarian concept that "the greatest good of the greatest number" is the only measure of good or ethical behaviour, and Singer believes that there is no reason not to apply this principle to other animals, arguing that the boundary between human and "animal" is completely arbitrary.