A Choice/Need Problem And Hunting
Print This Post
To defend hunting with the argument ‘I don’t kill for fun, but for food’ only follows if you don’t consume the bodies of farmed nonhuman animals. Implied in this justification is the issue of need: the violence becomes defensible because it isn’t a choice, which would mean you could simply choose not to do violence. If, however, this implied premise isn’t satisfied and you eat both farmed and ‘free’ nonhuman animals, then the argument in question is erroneous and a justification for one’s choice to act violently is required. You may eat the victim; however, the impetus for the killing, given the availability of farmed resources, is one’s choice to do so.
The reason for this choice then isn’t sustenance but something else. When ‘for food’ is proven baseless, however, which, a priori, seems to be the only justifiable excuse for causing suffering in this way, whatever the reason may be, it is reasonable to argue that it’s lacking, ethically. ‘Entertainment’ and ‘tradition’ come to mind as reasons that are truly lacking.
I can foresee an argument against this position that accepts the conclusion but qualifies the premise with ‘healthy food’. Perhaps you do have access to farmed nonhuman animal bodies but these food items aren’t nutritious. Therefore, you eat some flesh from mass sources but you supplement it with hunting. This seems reasonable, however, for it to be applicable, actually, the situation would have to be an extreme circumstance.
Crossposted @ That Vegan Girl
“The reason for this choice then isn’t sustenance but something else.”
I’ve heard these “reasons” for hunting: taste, tradition, fun, entertainment, skill development, population control, God, etc.
They’re ALL lacking.
Hunters have a bloodlust. They are violent and dangerous.
Er, what is the (a priori!) argument that justifies suffering for the sake of food?
Suffering isn’t justified for the ‘sake of food’, unqualified; it’s a priori justified for the sake of survival qua survival. I would extend this logic to include all animals, human and nonhuman.
~ Recent blog post: That Vegan Girl ~
Huh. So how much suffering is permissible in order to keep me alive?
Jay,
Think of it like this: If you were stranded on a deserted island and there were no trees or plants of any kind, but there was one cow, it would be ethically permissible to kill and eat the cow.
When it’s kill or be killed, or when it’s kill or die, then it’s morally acceptable to kill. Think about the self-defense justification for murder. It’s not murder if you do it in self-defense.
But eating meat in modern-day society with grocery stores or hunting in canned hunts or hunting when you have access to grocery stores with produce sections, then it’s NOT ethically permissible to kill.
Jay, you seem to be implying an absolutist principle against suffering, which doesn’t follow.
~ Recent blog post: That Vegan Girl ~
Alex wrote, “Jay, you seem to be implying an absolutist principle against suffering, which doesn’t follow.”
Er, it doesn’t follow from what?
Eccentric Vegan wrote, “Think of it like this: If you were stranded on a deserted island and there were no trees or plants of any kind, but there was one cow, it would be ethically permissible to kill and eat the cow.”
Is it ethically permissible for me to kill and eat a fellow human in such a situation? Alex seems to think so, and your conflation of self-defense with a desert island scenario seems to indicate you do as well.
I expect you’ll object at this point – something about humans having relatively more value than a cow, perhaps. So instead you’re committed to killing a cow whenever you require food which, in a desert island scenario, could lead to millions of deaths just so you – a valuable human! – can live. This doesn’t seem very palatable from a vegan standpoint.
Or how about this. Let’s say my liver is failing due to some rare disease. Only essential parts from a cow liver will save me, but to retrieve those parts we must kill a cow. Is it permissible for the doctors to kill a cow in order to save my life? (If so, suppose the cow’s liver will only prolong my life for a month. Is it permissible to continue killing cows each month so that I may survive?)
Seems like some strange consequences, at least for vegans. Where have I gone wrong?