February 13th, 2012
BY KIM BARTLETT
A common objection
posed by meat-eaters to considering a vegetarian diet is that �plants have
feelings� which may be comparable to the feelings of animals, or that the
result of a vegetarian diet is for more plants to die than animals and thus
the net amount of killing is somehow equal.
While it is essential to
realize that these arguments are virtually always made by people as a way to
dismiss the idea of not eating animals without having to seriously consider
the moral advantage of a vegetarian diet, the vegetarian advocate must be
prepared to respond to these objections. There are three main points to
understand.
First, the sole biological purpose of pain is to ensure
that a living organism gets away from or avoids potentially life-threatening
dangers. Since plants are unable to escape life-threatening situations (with
a few very rare exceptions), there is no reason to imagine that plants would
have evolved a sense of pain. While plants have consciousness�no doubt
qualitatively different from animal consciousness�they have no discernible
nervous system. Plants do respond to stimuli and have evolved biological
defenses against insect and microbial threats and occasionally produce
poisons to keep animals away, but there is no rational basis for believing
that plants experience the sensation of pain, as animals know pain. That is
not to say, however, that plants have no preference for life over death. To
explore the consciousness of plants as well as fungi and single-celled
organisms, there is no better place to begin than Jeremy Narby�s book
INTELLIGENCE IN NATURE.
Second, a common means of reproduction by
plants is via seeds embedded in edible fruit produced expressly for the
purpose of attracting animals who will then consume the fruit and later drop
the seeds along with natural manure fertilizer. Plants first appeared on the
earth more than a billion years ago. But since the time animals emerged�only
600 million years ago�plants and animals have co-evolved in remarkable ways.
The first seeding plants evolved 350 million years ago, and their
reproductive strategy relied on animals to spread the seeds. The flowers
that so delight us were produced by plants to attract nectar-eating
creatures such as bees who transfer pollen from one plant to another. Plants
seem to know when their pollinating species are active and in proximity from
such indicators as bark-nibbling and pecking, and plants may conserve
moisture and energy by not fruiting until migratory or hibernating
pollinators are present. The point of fruit, nut, grain, and nectar
production by plants is for animals to eat it, and thus to aid in the
propagation of plants.
Third, while humans and other animals
sometimes eat the entire plant or otherwise destroy the plant during feeding
or harvesting, the cost of meat production in terms of the amount of plant
protein needed to feed an animal to produce meat is so high that people are
responsible for far less plant consumption by eating plants directly rather
than eating the animals who ate the plants. It takes approximately 20 pounds
of plant protein to provide one pound of beef. The plant protein/meat ratio
is lower for the production of other kinds of animal flesh, but a pound of
any kind of meat costs several times more plant protein than if one eats the
plant protein directly. This was basically the argument used by Francis
Moore Lappe in DIET FOR A SMALL PLANET, when she pointed out that many more
people could be fed (and fewer plants would lose their lives) if people
adopted a vegetarian diet.
It is true that no individual can exist
without some other organisms losing their lives�even if it is only
incidental or accidental. Not even a vegan diet�which forbids all animal
products including eggs, dairy products, and honey�ensures that no animals
were killed or injured during the production of the food. Mice and other
field dwellers are always killed or dislocated during planting and
harvesting, and insects and so-called vermin species may in fact be even
more ruthlessly persecuted by organic farmers than by more typical
agribusinesses because the profit margin may be smaller on the typically
smaller organic farms.
But if one truly believes that killing a
carrot is as bad as killing an animal, then the moral imperative is to
refrain from eating either instead of eating both. Thousands of years ago,
the Jains of India categorized life-forms by order of sentience, as a guide
to eating in the spirit of �ahimsa��the guiding principle of Jainism which
directs people to live their lives so as to do the least harm to others.
Single-celled organisms (which had not yet been scientifically discovered)
were listed as the lowest form of life. Next were listed plants, then fungi,
then animals. Using the principle of ahimsa as a guide, some Jains to this
day refrain from eating whole plants such as carrots and potatoes or fungi
such as mushrooms, but Jains still acknowledge that eating animals is many
times worse in terms of causing unnecessary pain and suffering than eating
whole plants.
Kim Bartlett is publisher and president of Animal
People, the world�s leading independent publication devoted to ecoanimal
issues.
Pamela Gale Malhotra - Trustee
SAI (Save Animals
Initiative) Sanctuary Trust,
Theralu Village & Post, South Kodagu, 571249
Karnataka, India
Tel: (in Sanctuary) +91-(0)8274-238022/238036
Fax:
(in Sanctuary) +91-(0)8274-238021
Wireless: (in Sanctuary) 93419-75527
Mobile: 98803-59367
Email:
saisanctuary@gmail.com
Website:
www.saisanctuary.coma
