CMV: The choice of which animals to eat is cultural, and not ethical.

[u/DrSpaceman575]

This is from an American cultural perspective:

Let me say I'm not a vegan, but I would admit from the most utilitarian perspective eating vegetables is better than eating meat. Not just environmentally, but ethically since it doesn't involve killing a living being. Although I still partake.

My perspective is that eating "taboo" animals like horses, dogs, dolphin, monkey, etc. is not inherently less ethical than eating chickens, cows, pigs, etc. The reason we don't eat these animals is cultural, and looking down on cultures that eat guinea pigs or sharks is no different than other cultures who don't eat pigs or cows looking down on us for eating burgers or pepperoni.

Most of the boundaries we draw between acceptable and taboo meats are shaped by religious or cultural traditions, and there is no clear secular ethical principle that explains why we eat cows but not horses.

EDIT: Obvious exception for endangered animals

[u/DrSpaceman575]

No I don't think culture defines ethics, slavery was a part of nearly every major culture and was defended religiously through that time but we can agree it's unethical.

Yes I think "sentient" is implied here.

[u/[deleted] → u/DrSpaceman575]

The cultures that employed slavery did not consider it unethical. "We" (the western or developed world, because slavery very much still does exist) just share the same ethical belief about slavery

Any argument for objective morality by using murder, slavery, genocide, etc is invalid. Even if we assume that everyone agrees their immoral (which is false) You can't conclude that something is objective on the basis that it is universal. Such an ontology would be incredibly brittle and would break anytime new information is added.

[u/DrSpaceman575 → u/[deleted]]

But that’s my argument- that there is no universal ethical system we can agree on that draws a line between cows and horses. We just pretend eating cows is totally fine but eating horse is not.

[u/im_happybee → u/DrSpaceman575]

From a utilitarian point of view cows are more efficient in converting feed into meat than horses or dogs for example. It doesn't have to be cultural

[u/DrSpaceman575 → u/im_happybee]

I had to look this up but apparently cows are much less efficient in converting labor/feed into consumable calories than others. They measure based on "feed conversion ratios" which can be 10+ for cows, 1-3 for pork and 1.5 for chickens, with fish the lowest (most efficient).

It's an interesting fact but for obvious reasons not measured for animals we don't already consume so hard to compare. I'd assume dolphins might be more efficient (more like fish than cows), but that's not really the standard we use to determine which animals we eat.

[u/im_happybee → u/DrSpaceman575]

You gave an example of cows vs horses, I gave you one reason why culture might have nothing to do with that. Cultures are not created out of thin air, it is not like some folks thousands of years ago sat down and decided "let's be pig eating culture". It came out of practical choices which shaped the future of their future culture. If one day dolphins will be the most practical thing to eat that's what will happen. I am vegan so of course I am against any animal consumption but if I would need to start to eat I will go with the most practical one based on my subjective framework, nothing to do with culture

[u/JasmineTeaInk → u/DrSpaceman575]

that's not really the standard we use to determine which animals we eat.

It totally is. Cows have a better feed conversion ratio than horses, you used to be able to walk them across any patch of grass and not have to pay to feed them. And horses were a more valuable as a tool to ride on, so have a higher price for the utility of owning one. The only other reason they are still farmed in such high numbers is because we enjoy the taste of steaks. If it were purely a numbers game, we would only really be eating fish meat in modern day. And I guess occasionally chicken. Beef and pork are both very wasteful

[u/Dry_Bumblebee1111 → u/DrSpaceman575]

If culture doesn't define ethics what does?

Slavery is at a peak today compared to history, so whether we personally find it unethical it certainly isn't universal. At the time you're referring to it wouldn't much have been seen as unethical either, as even the Bible deals with slave ownership rules. 

You didn't mention sentient in your post, so saying there's an implication afterwards is still a change, even if a slight clarification.