I agree with what you said:

“I think in the end, a new concept must be defined by those who create the concept and have an interest in its definition. If that definition is unclear, as ‘Veganism’ is, we must interpret the original as best we can (or simply create a new concept).”

I think the reason the definition of vegan is sometimes unclear is because the people who choose veganism are in such a small minority and are often isolated from one another that the non-vegan majority tends to define us just as or more often as we define ourselves. That, and the fact that we’re a diverse group ourselves wherein some believe in true animal rights and some believe in animal welfare, etc.

When I pose the question “What is vegan?” at a cooking forum I receive a very different response than when I ask it at an animal rights forum. Dietary vegans tend to want to be included in the definition whereas AR vegans sometimes want to exclude purely dietary vegans. Personally, I prefer that dietary vegans don’t identify as vegan. I’m fine with them identifying as vegetarian but I think veganism is much more than just diet.

Read The China Study. He never mentions “vegan” because he and his family chose a plant-based diet for health reasons only, not for animal rights or any other reason. When asked what they eat, they say “Plants.”

You do not identify as vegan. You are not in the group of people I’m suggesting should define the term. Problem solved.

I do feel it’s an added bonus that I am not contributing to the death/poor living conditions of animals.

If we don’t allow some inconsistency, we threaten the stability of the movement built around the concept. I myself am at fault here, as I argue that those who are vegan because it’s their preferred diet are in fact not “vegan” at all but herbivores. Veganism is about justice, not about diet. That said, allowing inconsistency also threatens stability – we have two different definitions of Veganism on this very thread.

I think in the end, a new concept must be defined by those who create the concept and have an interest in its definition. If that definition is unclear, as “Veganism” is, we must interpret the original as best we can (or simply create a new concept).

Quote:

“Do I, being a person who is eating vegan because someone challenged me to try it and I found that I felt better, get to help decide what a vegan is if I end up not defined as a vegan?”

Yes, CareyElla. If you are defined-out does that matter? As you said, you simply do not consume anything from a nonhuman for health?

~ Recent blog post: The recent dog shooting. at http://www.not-quiteright.net/tvg ~

It’s much more fair for people who identify as vegan to define the term, not people who don’t identify as vegan. For example, I am often irritated at dictionary definitions written by outsiders because they don’t capture the essence of particular meanings. See the example I’ve given above. The dictionary definition describes veganism purely as a dietary choice. But if you ask a random sampling of vegans, a significant percentage, perhaps even the majority, will define veganism as more than just a way of eating.

Personally, I would just say that I follow a vegan diet.