The CyberPhilosopher

About 7 months ago I listened to an interview on Point of Inquiry with Peter Singer.  The effect on my life from that single interview was as immediate and drastic as any other single interaction (one way or bi-directionally) that I can think of.After listening, I decided to give up eating most meat.   This was not intented to be a sudden and complete change, as I have a wife and child to also consider and did not want to throw their diet into complete dis-array.  Nutrition was also a concern for my son since I had not yet done the research about having a complete diet for a growing child (iron is a potential issue for example).  My wife however supported me in my decision completely, and while they occasionally will eat meat, our home cooked meals are meatless and me-friendly.But why you ask?  What caused me to give up eating the main food product that I have LOVED for my entire life?  A simple thing: Ethics.   The logic goes as follows:  we choose to extend moral and ethical treatment towards individuals/things for a reason.  While ethics may have evolved in a social contract fashion, that is not where it is now (ask yourself, what obligation in a contact sense do you have to a baby that is not yours or a adult that is mentally a veg.).   We extend moral and ethical treatment beyond our ingroups and therefore beyond the likely chances of return.When I at least evaluated the qualifications that I use to extend ethical treatment (or considerations at the least) to a thing,  I found that it did not make sense for me to limit that treatment to humans.    Bad treatment of an animal is in most cases as bad as doing it for a human when looked at existentially.And here is the biggest piece in this structure of a meatless diet for ethical reasons: I don’t need to eat meat.   I know of many people that don’t eat Veal because the treatment of the animals is cruel.  They can take this moral high-ground because veal is not a requirement for their diet, and so they see the cruel treatment in its aquisition as unnecessary and below the ethical horizon of humanity.    But consistancy and common sense would lead anyone that has this position to a much more meatless diet because treatment of animals as ends, without consideration for their natural drives, is similarly cruel, and completely unnecessary for most Americans who can get substanially better nutrition from eating vegetarian diets (as well as reduce a large number of potential medical issues).Now, the disclaimer.  I have not gone all the way yet.  I’m working on it, and hoping too do this, however I still limit myself to eating seafood (minus squid).  I look at this as nutritional, and a way to make the diet easier on my family.   I believe myself to be inconsistant at this point, but making progress towards a more ethical morel position.