Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:33, 4 July 2015

Carnism is a prevailing belief system which endorses the killing of certain species of animals for meat or other purposes. Central to this belief system is a classification of certain species, such as cattle and pigs, as food, which justifies treating them in ways which would be regarded as animal cruelty if applied to other species, such as horses and dogs. This classification is culturally relative, so that in China, dogs can be slaughtered for meat, while in much of India, cows are inviolate.

The term was coined by social psychologist Melanie Joy and popularized by her 2010 book Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows. Joy stated that her reason for writing the book was to examine an apparent paradox in most people's behavior toward animals: that they exhibit compassion toward some species while eating others. This phenomenon has become known as the meat paradox. Joy and other psychologists propose that the phenomenon is enabled by the perceptions that eating meat is "natural, normal, necessary, and nice" (the "four Ns.")

Studies of the meat paradox

The conflict many people face between their food choices and their beliefs about animal welfare entails cognitive dissonance which has recently been the subject of research. A 2010 study randomly assigned college students to eat either beef jerky or cashews, and then assigned them the task of judging the moral relevance and cognitive abilities of a variety of animals. Compared to students who were given cashews, those who ate beef jerky expressed significantly less moral concern for animals, and assigned cows a diminished ability to have mental states which entail the capacity to experience suffering. Subsequent studies in 2011 similarly found that people were more inclined to feel it was appropriate to kill an animal for food when they perceived that it had diminished mental capacities, that, conversely, they perceived animals as having diminished mental capacities when told they were used as food, and once again that eating meat caused participants to ascribe fewer mental abilities to animals. Separately, subjects who read a description of an exotic animal rated it as less sympathetic and less able to experience suffering if they were told that native people ate the animal, regardless of whether they were told that the animal was hunted or that it was scavenged. These findings confirm Joy's theory that categorization as food itself diminishes moral concern for animals. Carnism may involve further categories, such as "pets," "vermin," "entertainment animals" and so forth, which color subjective perceptions.

A series of studies of moral reasoning around the meat paradox found that the "four Ns" accounted for the great majority of American and Australian meat eaters' stated justifications for consuming meat. Arguments included that humans are omnivores (natural), that vegetarian diets are lacking in nutrients (necessary), that most people eat meat (normal), and that meat tastes good (nice). People who endorsed such arguments were found to have less moral concern for animals and attribute less consciousness to them, to be more supportive of social inequality and hierarchical ideologies, and to be less proud of their consumer choices. However, meat-eaters who expressed these views more strongly reported less guilt about their dietary habits.

Vegan discourse

As a set of ideas which legitimate the common uses of animals, carnism can be seen as the opposing ideology to ethical veganism. From this perspective, it plays a role in animal ethics analogous to that of patriarchy in feminist theory, as a dominant normative ideology which goes unrecognized specifically because of its ubiquity. Vegans may argue that carnism is based on the objectification of animals, in that meat is perceived as a thing rather than part of a creature, and in that meat-eaters may deny animals consciousness.

Earlier ideas

The concept that Man's use of animals entails learned prejudice dates back at least to Plutarch, who in the first century CE sought to shift the burden of evidence onto those who opposed vegetarianism, writing

For my part I rather wonder both by what accident and in what state of soul or mind the first man who did so, touched his mouth to gore and brought his lips to the flesh of a dead creature, he who set forth tables of dead, stale bodies and ventured to call food and nourishment the parts that had a little before bellowed and cried, moved and lived.

For most of history, however, it has been tacitly assumed that human domination of animals, including their use as food, is natural and normal. Beginning in the 17th century and until very recently, Cartesian mechanism, which denied animal consciousness, was a prevailing philosophy in the West. This once-dominant argument is at odds with the predominant view of modern neuroscientists, who, notwithstanding philosophical problems with the definition of consciousness even in humans, now generally hold that animals are conscious. A modern theory similar to Cartesian mechanism is advanced by Marian Dawkins, who rejects the view that animals are conscious and instead defines animal welfare as "the state of an animal that is both healthy and has what it wants." She advocates prioritizing animal health and human self-interest.

In the 1970's, orthodox views on the moral standing of animals were notably challenged by Richard D. Ryder and Peter Singer, who introduced the notion of speciesism, which they defined as discrimination on the basis of species for what they saw as morally irrelevant reasons. Carnism can be understood as a type of speciesism, involving a particular form of species-based discrimination. Radical abolitionist Gary Francione has written in opposition of vegans using the concept of carnism on the grounds that it deflects attention from broader issues of speciesism, and thereby may inadvertently promote welfarist ideas.

See also

• Ethics of eating meat

References

External links

• Beyond Carnism
• Melanie Joy discusses carnism (2015) - TED talk

1. ^ Gibert, M., Desaulniers, E. (2014). Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics. Springer Netherlands. pp. 292–298. ISBN 978-94-007-0929-4.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
2. ^ Gutjahr, J. (2013). "The reintegration of animals and slaughter into discourses of meat eating". The ethics of consumption. Wageningen Academic Publishers. pp. 379–385. ISBN 978-90-8686-784-4.
3. Rothgerber, H. (2014). "Efforts to overcome vegetarian-induced dissonance among meat eaters". Appetite. 79: 32–41. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.04.003. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
4. ^ Braunsberger, K., Flamm, R. (2015). "Consumer Identities: Carnism Versus Veganism". The Sustainable Global Marketplace. Springer International Publishing. p. 345. ISBN 978-3-319-10873-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
5. ^ Kool, V. K.; Agrawal, Rita (2009). The Psychology of Nonkilling. In Joám Evans Pim (Ed.), Toward a Nonkilling Paradigm (pp. 349-370). Center for Global Nonkilling. ISBN 978-0-9822983-1-2.
6. Joy, M. (2011) . Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows. Conari Press. ISBN 1573245054.
7. "My Conversation With Melanie Joy on "Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows"". PlanetGreen. Retrieved 3 July 2015.
8. Benz-Schwarzburg, J., Nawroth, C. (2015). "Know your pork – or better don't: debating animal minds in the context of the meat paradox". Know your food: Food ethics and innovation, 1. Wageningen Academic Publishers. pp. 233–240. ISBN 978-90-8686-813-1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
9. ^ Goodyer, P. "Meat eaters justify diet using 'Four Ns': natural, necessary, normal, nice". Retrieved 3 July 2015.
10. Singal, J. "How people rationalize eating meat". Retrieved 3 July 2015.
11. ^ Piazza, J.; et al. (2015). "Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns". Appetite. 91: 114–128. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
12. ^ Bastian, B.; et al. (2012). "Don't Mind Meat? The Denial of Mind to Animals Used for Human Consumption". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 38 (2): 247–256. doi:10.1177/0146167211424291. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
13. Rothberger, H. (2014). "Efforts to overcome vegetarian-induced dissonance among meat eaters". Appetite. 79: 32–41. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.04.003. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
14. ^ Loughnan, S.; et al. (2014). "The Psychology of Eating Animals". Current Directions in Psychological Science. 23 (2): 104–108. doi:10.1177/0963721414525781. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
15. Loughnan, S.; et al. (2010). "The role of meat consumption in the denial of moral status and mind to meat animals". Appetite. 55 (1): 156–159. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2010.05.043. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
16. Bratanova, B.; et al. (2011). "The effect of categorization as food on the perceived moral standing of animals". Appetite. 57 (1): 193–196. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.04.020. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
17. Greenebaum, J. (2012). "Managing Impressions: "Face-Saving" Strategies of Vegetarians and Vegans". Humanity & Society. 36 (4): 309–325. doi:10.1177/0160597612458898. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
18. Plutarch, translated by W. Heinemann (1957). De esu carnium (On Eating Meat), Loeb Classical Library Ed., Vol. XII. Harvard University Press. p. 541.
19. "The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness" (PDF). Retrieved 26 May 2015.
20. "Scientists Finally Conclude Nonhuman Animals Are Conscious Beings". Retrieved 26 May 2015.
21. ^ Elmwood, R. W. (2012). "Book Review: Why Animals Matter. Animal Consciousness, Animal Welfare, and Human Well-being". Animal Behaviour. 84 (4): 1081. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.08.006. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
22. Why Animals Matter: Animal Consciousness, Animal Welfare, and Human Well-being, 2012, Marian Stamp Dawkins
23. Francione, Gary L. (October 2, 2012). Nothing "Invisible" About Animal Exploitation Ideology. Opposing Views.

• Animal rights
• Discrimination
• Ethical theories
• Prejudices
• Philosophy of biology