How to Reply to Some Ethical Objections to Entomophagy

Annals of the Entomological Society of America 112 (6):511–517 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Some people have moral objections to insect consumption. After explaining the philosophical motivations for such objections, I discuss three of them, suggesting potential replies. The first is that insect consumption ignores the precautionary principle, which we can gloss here as “Don’t know, don’t farm.” In other words, while there might be evidence that insects are not conscious, we do not know that they are not; so, we should not take the moral risk associated with killing them en masse. The second concern is driven by a different way of assessing moral risk — namely, by calculating expected utility. The short version: even if it is incredibly unlikely that insects are conscious, farming them involves harming so many of them that it is better simply to grow plants instead. The third concern is about whether insects live “net negative lives,” with more pain than pleasure. The thought is that if they do, then their lives are not worth living overall, in which case it is wrong to bring them into existence. I conclude by considering the prospects for strategic alliances between animal advocates and those who promote insect consumption, in the even that they are unable to resolve their moral disagreements.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,783

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Bugging the Strict Vegan.Bob Fischer - 2016 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (2):255-263.
Collecting Insects to Conserve Them: A Call for Ethical Caution.Bob Fischer & Brendon Larson - 2019 - Insect Conservation and Biodiversity 12 (3):173–182.
Ethical Obligations Toward Insect Pests.Michael L. Draney - 1997 - Ethics and the Environment 2 (1):5-23.
Invertebrate Minds: A Challenge for Ethical Theory.Peter Carruthers - 2007 - The Journal of Ethics 11 (3):275-297.
Intrinsic Value and the Genetic Engineering of Animals.R. B. M. De Vries - 2008 - Environmental Values 17 (3):375 - 392.
What’s Wrong with Joyguzzling?Ewan Kingston & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (1):169-186.
Manliness in Plato’s Laches.T. F. Morris - 2009 - Dialogue 48 (3):619.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-02-07

Downloads
29 (#549,529)

6 months
8 (#356,676)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Bob Fischer
Texas State University

Citations of this work

What Would the Virtuous Person Eat? The Case for Virtuous Omnivorism.Christopher A. Bobier - 2021 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 34 (3):1-19.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 2004 - Univ of California Press.
The case for animal rights.Tom Regan - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring ethics: an introductory anthology. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Human Studies 8 (4):389-392.
Field Deaths in Plant Agriculture.Bob Fischer & Andy Lamey - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (4):409-428.
The Moral Problem of Other Minds.Jeff Sebo - 2018 - The Harvard Review of Philosophy 25:51-70.

View all 9 references / Add more references