Ad
related to: meat paradox psychology quizlet biologystudy.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
One question examined in the psychology of eating meat has been termed the meat paradox: "How can individuals care about animals, but also eat them?" [ 48 ] [ 49 ] Internal dissonance can be created if people's beliefs and emotions about animal treatment do not match their eating behavior, although it may not always be subjectively perceived as ...
There is experimental evidence supporting the idea that the meat paradox induces cognitive dissonance in Westerners. [ 9 ] [ 25 ] [ 26 ] Westerners are more willing to eat animals which they regard as having lesser mental capacities and moral standing, and conversely, to attribute lesser mental faculties and moral standing to animals which are ...
Meat paradox: People care about animals, but embrace diets that involve harming them. Moral paradox : A situation in which moral imperatives clash without clear resolution. Outcomes paradox : Schizophrenia patients in developing countries seem to fare better than their Western counterparts.
About 7 in 10 U.S. adults said they would somewhat or strongly oppose raising taxes on the sale of meat and 43% would oppose banning public advertising for meat on government property.
While meat eaters may have an inner conflict about the killing of animals for their food, this explanation of vegaphobia may not hold up to environmental reasons for avoiding meat. Environmentalist meat eaters may not see a conflict in eating meat because they see their individual environmental impact of meat consumption as low.
Melanie Joy (born September 2, 1966) is an American social psychologist and author, primarily notable for coining and promulgating the term carnism. [1] She is the founding president of nonprofit advocacy group Beyond Carnism, previously known as Carnism Awareness & Action Network (CAAN), [2] as well as a former professor of psychology and sociology at the University of Massachusetts Boston. [3]
"The Meat Eaters" is a 2010 essay by the American philosopher Jeff McMahan, published as an op-ed in The New York Times.In the essay, McMahan asserts that humans have a moral obligation to stop eating meat and, in a conclusion considered to be controversial, that humans also have a duty to prevent predation by individuals who belong to carnivorous species, if we can do so without inflicting ...
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.