The Logic of Vegetarianism E-Book

Henry S. Salt

• Herausgeber: Henry S. Salt
• Kategorie: Lebensstil
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2015

Beschreibung

It is the special purpose of this book to set forth in a clear and rational manner The Logic of Vegetarianism. To the ethical, the scientific, and the economic aspects of the system much attention has already been given by well-accredited writers, but there has not as yet been any organised effort to present the logical view—that is, the dialectical scope of the arguments, offensive and defensive, on which the case for vegetarianism is founded. I am aware that mere logic is not in itself a matter of first rate importance, and that a great humane principal, based on true natural instinct, will in the long run have fulfilment, whatever wordy battles may rage around it for a time; nevertheless, there is no better method of hastening that result than to set the issues before the public in a plain and unmistakable light. I wish, therefore, in this work, to show what vegetarianism is, and (a scarcely less essential point) what vegetarianism is not.

Leseprobe

Henry S. Salt

The Logic of Vegetarianism

UUID: b3bcfc7a-a324-11e5-b52c-119a1b5d0361

This ebook was created with StreetLib Write (http://write.streetlib.com)by Simplicissimus Book Farm

Table of contents

THE MORALIST AT THE SHAMBLES.

INTRODUCTORY

WHY "VEGETARIAN"?

THE RAISON D'ÊTRE OF VEGETARIANISM

THE PAST AND PRESENT OFVEGETARIANISM

STRUCTURAL EVIDENCE

THE APPEAL TO NATURE

THE HUMANITARIAN ARGUMENT

PALLIATIONS AND SOPHISTRIES

THE CONSISTENCY TRICK

THE DEGRADATION OF THE BUTCHER

THE ÆSTHETIC ARGUMENT

THE HYGIENIC ARGUMENT

DIGESTION

CONDITIONS OF CLIMATE

FLESH MEAT AND MORALS

THE ECONOMIC ARGUMENT

DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES

BIBLE AND BEEF

THE FLESH-EATER'S KITH AND KIN

VEGETARIANISM AS RELATED TO OTHER REFORMS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES:

THE MORALIST AT THE SHAMBLES.

Where slaughter'd beasts lie quivering, pile on pile,And bare-armed fleshers, bathed in bloody dew,Ply hard their ghastly trade, and hack and hew,And mock sweet Mercy's name, yet loathe the whileThe lot that chains them to this service vile,Their hands in hideous carnage to imbrue:Lo, there!—the preacher of the Good and True,The Moral Man, with sanctimonious smile!"Thrice happy beasts," he murmurs, "'tis our love,Our thoughtful love that sends ye to the knife(Nay, doubt not, as ye welter in your gore!);For thus alone ye earned the boon of life,And thus alone the Moralist may proveHis sympathetic soul—by eating more."

INTRODUCTORY

It is the special purpose of this book to set forth in a clear and rational manner the logic of vegetarianism. To the ethical, the scientific, and the economic aspects of the system much attention has already been given by well-accredited writers, but there has not as yet been any organised effort to present the logical view—that is, the dialectical scope of the arguments, offensive and defensive, on which the case for vegetarianism is founded. I am aware that mere logic is not in itself a matter of first rate importance, and that a great humane principal, based on true natural instinct, will in the long run have fulfilment, whatever wordy battles may rage around it for a time; nevertheless, there is no better method of hastening that result than to set the issues before the public in a plain and unmistakable light. I wish, therefore, in this work, to show what vegetarianism is, and (a scarcely less essential point) what vegetarianism is not.For though, owing to the propaganda carried on for the last fifty years, there has been an increasing talk of vegetarianism, and a considerable discussion of its doctrines, there are still very numerous misunderstandings of its real aims and meaning. In this, as in other phases of the great progressive movement of which vegetarianism is a part, to give expression to a new idea is to excite a host of blind and angry prejudices. The champions of the old are too disdainful to take counsel with the champions of the new; hence they commonly attribute to them designs quite different from those which they really entertain, and unconsciously set up a straw man for the pleasure of pummelling him with criticism. Devoid always of a sense of sympathy, and mostly of a sense of humour, they absurdly exaggerate the least vital points in their adversaries' reasoning, while they often fail to note what is the very core of the controversy. It is therefore of great concern to vegetarianism that its case should be so stated as to preclude all possibility of doubt as to the real issues involved. If agreement is beyond our reach, let us at least ascertain the precise point of our disagreement.With a view to this result, it will be convenient to have recourse now and then to the form of dialogue, so as to bring into sharper contrast the pros and cons of the argument. Nor will these conversations be altogether imaginary, for, to avoid any suspicion of burlesquing the counter-case of our opponents by a fanciful presentment, I shall introduce only such objections to vegetarianism as have actually been insisted on—the stock-objections, in fact, which crop up again and again in all colloquies on food reform—with sometimes the very words of the flesh-eating disputant. It is not my fault if some of these objections appear to be foolish. I have often marvelled at the reckless way in which those who would combat new and unfamiliar notions step forth to the encounter, unprovided with intellectual safeguards, and trusting wholly to certain ancient generic fallacies, which, if we may judge from their appearance in all ages and climates, are indigenous in the human mind. Many of the difficulties which the flesh-eater to-day propounds to the vegetarian are the same, mutatis mutandis, as those which have at various times been cast in the teeth of the reformer by the apologists of every cruel and iniquitous custom, from slave-holding to the suttee.To show the unreality of these sophisms, by clearing away the misconceptions upon which they rest, and to state the creed of vegetarianism as preached and practised by its friends rather than as misapprehended by its foes—such is the object of this work. To make "conversions," in the ordinary sense, is not my concern. What we have to do is to discover who are flesh-eaters by ingrained conviction, and who by thoughtlessness and ignorance, and to bring over to our side from the latter class those who are naturally allied to us, though by accident ranged in opposition. And this, once more, can only be done by making the issues unmistakable.Incidentally, I hope these pages may suggest to our antagonists that vegetarians, perhaps, are not the weak brainless sentimentalists that they are so often depicted. It is, to say the least of it, entertaining when a critic who has just been inquiring (for example) "what would become of the animals" if mankind were to desist from eating them, goes on to remark of vegetarians that "their hearts are better than their heads." Alas, we cannot truthfully return the compliment by saying of such a philosopher that his head is better than his heart! It cannot be too strongly stated that the appeal of vegetarianism, as of all humane systems, is not to heart alone, nor to brain alone, but to brain and heart combined, and that if its claims fail to win this double judgment they are necessarily void and invalid. The test of logic, no less than the test of feeling, is deliberately challenged by us; for it is only by those who can think as well as feel, and feel as well as think, that the diet question, or indeed any great social question, can ever be brought to its solution.

WHY "VEGETARIAN"?