Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBali, Paul
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-26T00:07:05Z
dc.date.available2019-09-26T00:07:05Z
dc.date.created2017-10-28 23:12
dc.date.issuedmanuscript
dc.identifieroai:philpapers.org/rec/BALBRA-2
dc.identifierhttps://philpapers.org/rec/BALBRA-2
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/615750
dc.description.abstractAndrew Smith makes his case against V-ism by appeal to (i) plant sentience, and (ii) the Transitivity of Eating principle (by which V-ans eat animals, since animals eat plants). By (i), V-ans are inconsistent in their prohibitions; by (ii) they are incoherent. But, I argue, Smith and his beloved omnivore animists face similar pressures, insofar as they prohibit cannibalism.
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectPhilosophy
dc.titleBook Review: A Critique of the Moral Defense of Vegetarianism
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/review
ge.collectioncodeGA
ge.dataimportlabelOAI metadata object
ge.identifier.legacyglobethics:11831848
ge.identifier.permalinkhttps://www.globethics.net/gel/11831848
ge.lastmodificationdate2017-10-28 23:12
ge.lastmodificationuseradmin@pointsoftware.ch (import)
ge.submissions0
ge.oai.exportid53
ge.oai.repositoryid4212
ge.oai.streamid1
ge.setnameGlobeEthicsLib
ge.setspecglobeethicslib
ge.linkhttps://philpapers.org/rec/BALBRA-2


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record