Summary
This article is behind a paywall. It has been included in the database and summarized below solely based on the content of the introductory paragraph.
According to the author, one of the most powerful arguments against ethical veganism is the inefficacy objection, which says that no individual’s choice to go vegan ever makes a difference due to the scale and complexity of the animal agriculture supply chain. The author argues that the best response to this objection is to rethink what ethical veganism entails. Traditionally, ethical veganism has typically held the view that being vegan is obligatory and consuming animal products is wrong. The author instead advocates for “new ethical veganism” with the view that it is good to be vegan, while leaving open whether or not it is obligatory. The author outlines four different specifications of this view, and argues that the common responses to the inefficacy objection support the new ethical veganism position.
Abstract cannot be posted