Being 'right' and being 'wrong'

1290: 

As soon as we feel ‘right’ about our argument, there’s a danger we become too cocky with it.  Our own certainty might be good for keeping us ‘on the wagon’, but too much certainty looks ugly.  So, it’s important for us to remember that we ourselves used to be no different to all those omnivores we criticise.  As an adult, and earlier as a child, almost every single person on this planet consumed any foods and confections that seemed attractive and were available, without question.  There was a tacit understanding that the value of each food needed nothing other than its taste; until relatively recently, there had never been an ethical component to food.  Food was eaten simply to satisfy hunger, maintain health and to give us pleasure.  There weren’t issues concerning animals, and very few concerning nutritional qualities.  It was only from the 1970’s that these issues started to get publicity.  Then macrobiotics and vegetarianism became all the rage, and after that came the stunning connection between animal sentience and the cruelty involved in animal farming and slaughtering.

The general reluctance to come to terms with the ethics behind animal-based foods was based on the belief that there was no need for any "special consideration for the sake of an animal”.

Up to now, we have been almost entirely human centred in our concerns; vegans suggest broadening that concern to include non-humans.

Our anthropocentricity will always suggest reasons to NOT alter animal-eating habits.  The mind will weigh compassion, but always come down on the side of fellow humans; there are enough humans to feel sorry for, without trying to empathise with all the animals too.  This conveniently brings us to believe that compassion doesn’t need to extend to animals, not the ones we eat anyway.

         

Life-long meat eaters don’t like admitting they could be wrong about day-to-day food habits. That would mean too much loss of face.  And consequently too ambitious a change of lifestyle. If we have been eating the same sort of foods all our lives, then it would take a lot of undoing, to do without animal products.

The established adult omnivore has an entrenched ego, a proud mind and a well established self image. To step down from all this and admit some major fault in oneself is difficult.  If a major attitude change is going to happen, it's best to happen at an early age.  Young people are less set in their ways, with fewer years of guilt about their food choices, which have largely been made by their elders.  Youth rebels, and a change of food habits could become the subject of rebellion and a stepping stone to building a more independent individuality.  A radical diet change might feel like making a stand, by accusing elders of being ‘asleep’ on animal issues (and many other issues too).  This particular stepping stone allows the young person to ‘set up camp’ on the other side of the river.