Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.
In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
Identity fallacy. It's when the argument is dismissed based on the arguer's social class, race, gender, etc:
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/234/Identity-Fallacy<> That kind of logic can be taken to absurd conclusions. Should one be a dog to argue for animal rights? A cow to argue that killing animals for food is bad or acceptable? a moral philosopher or bioethicist with credentials and who is trained in their field has a far higher probability of underatanding gender-related and female-related ethical issues than a feminazi whose only credential is "knowing what it's like to be a woman." Here's an interesting article by Dr. Bo about common fallacies in the social justice movement: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/bg/Bo/LogicalFallacies/UqIFDDHA/Top-Five-Logical-Fallacies-in-the-Social-Justice-Movement<> |
answered on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2018 05:27:08 PM by Abdulazeez |
Comments |
|
|
Looks like a form of the appeal to authority argument
|
answered on Thursday, Nov 22, 2018 06:22:01 AM by Alan |
Comments |
|