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 ...
Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows: An Introduction to Carnism is a 2009 book by American social psychologist Melanie Joy about the belief system and psychology of meat eating, or "carnism". [1] Joy coined the term carnism in 2001 and developed it in her doctoral dissertation in 2003.
"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 ...
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.
Meat-eating can involve discrepancies between the behavior of eating meat and various ideals that the person holds. [47] Some researchers call this form of moral conflict the meat paradox. [48] [49] Hank Rothgerber posited that meat eaters may encounter a conflict between their eating behavior and their affections toward animals. [47]
One explanation for vegaphobia is founded on the meat paradox: many people who eat meat do not like harming animals. Vegans remind them of this cognitive dissonance, and one way to resolve this inner conflict and reduce dissonance is to maintain prejudice against vegans. [14] [32] [33] [34]
On the ethics of eating meat, Huemer has commented that "In the overwhelming majority of actual cases, meat eaters do not have any reasons that could plausibly be claimed to justify the pain and suffering caused by their practice." [14] In 2016, he debated Bryan Caplan on the ethical treatment of animals, including insects. [15]