Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBranson, Zachary Andrewen_US
dc.identifier.citationBranson, Z. A. (2023). Why the diner is not defended: a critical examination of the diner's defence. Final Year Project (FYP), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
dc.description.abstractWith the well-received reception of plant-based foods, and the advent of cultured meat, the debate over the permissibility of the consumption of non-human animals are set to come back in the spotlight. Following an examination of arguments in the field of moral vegetarianism, I examine the Diner’s Defence by Abelard Podgorski in its attempt to justify the consumption of meat by avoiding the controversial commitments of the moral status of animals and their interests and show how it fails. I will also consider objections to my argument on behalf of Podgorski. Following the dialectic, proponents of the diner must bite the bullet and concede the permissibility of farming humans for consumption and/or/either organ usage or join in the controversial commitments debate to justify the consumption of meat. I will end my paper by discussing the future of the debate with cell-based meat entering the scene and its ethical concerns.en_US
dc.publisherNanyang Technological Universityen_US
dc.titleWhy the diner is not defended: a critical examination of the diner's defenceen_US
dc.typeFinal Year Project (FYP)en_US
dc.contributor.supervisorAndrew T. Forcehimesen_US
dc.contributor.schoolSchool of Humanitiesen_US
dc.description.degreeBachelor of Arts in Philosophyen_US
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:SoH Student Reports (FYP/IA/PA/PI)
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
  Restricted Access
307.71 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Page view(s)

Updated on May 22, 2024

Download(s) 50

Updated on May 22, 2024

Google ScholarTM


Items in DR-NTU are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.