The Omnivore’s Dilemma.

The Case of Pamphagia in Aristotle

and Plutarch
Abstract
Though Aristotle’s position on omnivory may seem in stark contrast to Plutarch’s vigorous defense of vegetarianism,
the following paper assumes that the moralist from Chaeronea uses teleological arguments that seem to recall
Aristotle’s theory of causality in order to fight against the ancient Stoic theory of the naturalness of human carnivorism.
After consideration of the Stagirite’s theories of nutrition, this paper discusses Plutarch’s possible re-use of and
deviation from the Aristotelian position of human omnivory (and carnivorism) as a proprium hominis, highlighting two
elements within Aristotle’s corpus that might have afforded Plutarch’s ‘vegetarian’ reading. Firstly, in Meteorologica,
cooking is seen as a pre-digestion process that takes place artificially outside the stomach. For Aristotle, cooking food
is simply seen as a proprium hominis, while for Plutarch this treatment of animal meat is considered as something
against nature. Secondly, in Aristotle’s ethical treatises, as well as in Problemata, the term pamphagia (‘omnivory’) is
not a neutral one, but means either ‘voracity’ or even ‘gluttony.’ This may have inspired Plutarch’s moralizing reading
of human pamphagia as an ethological and biological outrage, leading him to exploit these Aristotelian ambiguities for
his own purposes.