INDEPENDENT UNIVERSITY OF

BANGLADESH

NAME: tasfia anjum neha

ID: 1931246
Course :
Introduction to Philosophy
Section : 01

Course-ID : PHl 101

 SUBMITTED TO : Ms Parsa Sajid



SUMITTION DATE: 17.11 .2019

Introduction:
Veganism is a growing dietary choice, especially popular among young urban dwellers in
developed countries. I offered three main arguments as to why one may opt for veganism: to
avoid the suffering of nonhuman animals; to avoid the exploitation and, therefore, rights
violation, of nonhuman animals; and to diminish the amount of negative Global Health Impacts.
To provide an argument & opinion history of veganism with its definition. Provide our own
opinions with dept discussion why to support & opposing position & finally the conclusion with
a brief summary & providing questions, quotation & result.

Synthesize of work into an argumentative

Being a vegan is not only a diet but a lifestyle and a humane act towards animals. What is a
vegan? is vegan differ from vegetarian?
Vegetarians do not eat meat fish or poultry. Vegan in addition we can say as to being vegetarian,
do not use other product of animal’s origins. This all included eggs, milk, honey, other material
as well as leather silk etc.
There are many different types of people in this world, and they all have individual beliefs,
tastes, interests, and opinions. For example, especially when it comes to food, there is a variety
of products that people of various cultures and beliefs accept and reject. A typical vegan diet
consists of fruits, lots of leafy vegetables, whole grain products, nuts, seeds, and legumes. People
choose to be vegan for health, environmental, or ethical reasons. For example, many people
become vegans out of their concern for the unjust treatment of farm animals. Some object to the
unnecessary ‘use’ and killing of animals, while others just turn vegan due to the influence of
strong beliefs of their family members, friends, or vegan organizations. Veganism has become a
topic of debate in todays world, and there are many arguments that explain why a strict vegan is
beneficial or harmful for one’s health.
So, I want to be upfront that All plant-based diets are not created equal. I would argue that a
person who lives off the land and includes meat in their diet can have a smaller environmental
impact than a person who lives in the city and eats all plant-based food (most of which may be
packaged and shipped in). Plant-based diets often include food that is shipped from halfway
around the world burning fossil fuels, food that is covered in packaging which is very resource-
intensive (whether it’s recycled or not), and food that contains harmful ingredients like palm oil.
There’s also the fact that creating cropland to grow plant-based food displaces animal
populations and kills many of them.
This is my argument against veganism by someone who strongly supports veganism. What can
anyone describe me about it? I don’t think so. If their than most welcome.

My position:
I don’t support veganism. Because it just only plant based. Where, we can taste any kind of food
or meat as far as it tastes good & doesn’t affect us.
History:
November 1 is World Vegan Day, a festival of individuals who don't eat meat. Or on the
other hand whatever originates from or incorporates a creature. Nor do they utilize any
apparel, embellishment or item produced using a creature. No cowhide, no fleece, no
pearls, no ivory-keyed pianos. The creature free occasion started in 1994, to honor the
50th commemoration of the Vegan Society.
Veganism is an extraordinary type of vegetarianism, and however the term was instituted
in 1944, the idea of substance evasion can be followed back to old Indian and eastern
Mediterranean social orders. Vegetarianism is first referenced by the Greek logician and
mathematician Pythagoras of Samos around 500 BCE. Notwithstanding his hypothesis
about right triangles, Pythagoras advanced consideration among all species, including
people. Adherents of Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism likewise pushed vegetarianism,
accepting that people ought not incur torment on different creatures.
The main vegetarian lover society was formed in 1847 in England. After three years, Rev.
Sylvester Graham, the innovator of Graham saltines, helped to establish the American
Vegetarian Society. Graham was a Presbyterian clergyman and his adherents, called Grahamites,
complied with his directions for a temperate life: vegetarianism, restraint, forbearance, and
successive washing. In November 1944, a British carpenter named Donald Watson declared that
since veggie lovers ate dairy and eggs, he would make another term called "vegetarian," to
portray individuals who didn't. Tuberculosis had been found in 40% of Britain's dairy bovines
the prior year, and Watson utilized this to further his potential benefit, asserting that it
demonstrated the vegetarian way of life shielded individuals from corrupted nourishment. A
quarter of a year subsequent to authoring the term, he gave a conventional clarification of the
manner in which the word ought to be articulated: "Veegan, not Veejan," he wrote in his new
Vegan Society bulletin, which had 25 endorsers. When Watson passed on at age 95 of every
2005, there were 250,000 self-distinguishing veggie lovers in Britain and 2 million in the U.S.
Moby, Woody Harrelson and Fiona Apple are vegetarians. So is Dennis Kucinich.

Definition of veganism:
The word Veganism, a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as possible and practical, all
forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose. In
dietary terms, it refers to the practice of dispensing with all animal produce, including meat, fish,
poultry, eggs, animal milks, honey, and their derivatives.
Other Definitions (collected)
Animal Rights: the rights to humane treatment claimed on behalf of animals, especially the
right not to be exploited for human purposes.
Animal Welfare: the well-being of animals. Animal welfare people are against the abuse of
animals, but not necessarily against their exploitation.
Omnivore: a person who consumes both animal and plant foods.
Vegetarian: a person who doesn't consume meat for whatever reason. Reasons can include
religion, health or compassion. People who are vegetarian for compassion reasons usually
also abstain from using leather or other products for which an animal is killed.
Strict Vegetarian: a person who doesn't consume any animal products. This person follows
a vegan diet, but not necessarily a vegan lifestyle, which includes a moral concern for
animals.
Fruitarian: a person who consumes only fruits and nuts. If you want to learn more about
fruitarianism, please check out the website Mango the Raw Vegan Fruitarian.
Raw Foodist: a person who consumes between 75 and 100% raw foods. A food is
considered raw if it was not heated above 115 °F (46°C). Many raw foodists are also vegans,
but some consume raw meat, eggs, dairy or fish.
Lacto-vegetarian: a vegetarian who consumes dairy products, but doesn't eat eggs.
Ovo-vegetarian: a vegetarian who eats eggs, but doesn't consume dairy products.
Lacto-ovo-vegetarian: a vegetarian who consumes both eggs and dairy.
Pescetarian: also known as pesco-vegetarian. This is a vegetarian who consumes dairy,
eggs and fish.

LITERATURE REVIEW
“Veganism has been much ignored in research and is presently viewed in a similar way to
vegetarianism before its current vogue. If it is considered that vegetarianism challenges
conventional culture, it could be suggested that veganism challenges the same conventions to a
greater degree” (Povey, 2001, p. 16). The following literature review serves as a background to
recognize and examine scholarly works related to the vegan “identity,” the science that supports
and contributes to understanding the vegan movement, and the role of ethnography.
The way the scientific community and society views veganism is a critical context for
interpreting individuals’ decisions surrounding the lifestyle. Thus, it is important to have a
comprehensive context of the healthfulness of a vegan diet on a physical, biochemical level,
which is what I attempt to encompass here. Many of my interviewees discussed the importance
of personal and generational health when choosing to become or stay vegan – how it makes them
feel and why -- but none of them were nutritionists, physicians, or registered dietitians.
So as I want to tell that with my research that we cant stay in one path for our need & health
issue. If it effects our health then we need to stop or if we need more to grow our health than we
need to eat what we can. Because there are some animals that we can eat which ss fast regrowth
animals likely cows, chicken etc. Their are some that cant be eaten but how can you stop what
animals eats animals ?
Or what about the insects that we killing every time is it fair ? if vegan says protect animals.so
what about other things?

Stake your position and discuss in-depth including introducing

opposing position and why your position is better
I don’t support veganism. Because it just only plant based. Where, we can taste any kind of food
or meat as far as it taste good & doesn’t affect us.
We can Relate, some plants, fruit, nuts, and other putatively vegetarian foods might be
wrongfully produced. Ok If moral vegans arguments against meat-consumption are sound, then
are arguments against animal product consumption also sound? Might dairy, eggs, and honey be
wrongfully produced as moral vegans argue meat is? Might consuming them wrongfully relate
the consumer to that production?
They says that egg, milk, fish etc are ok to eat in veganism . fine then for that also it needs huge
production industrial way. It also harms environmentally & human health . the way they
produce. Again if we don’t eat meat that we can then ok they want to save animals but how? At a
time the animals will die or other animals will eat it. That ca be eaten & enjoying that meal.
Another way if vegan is right then they will plant huge fine for environment or health they
claimed! So now planting come with more water using new technology tractors, water pump,
generators, insect’s killer or poisoning the plant for their good harvest. Is it ethical? If it is ethical
than eating meat is also ethical. If we consider their words ok killing animals are not good. Fine
then plants also have lives. What makes you keeping out of food what you taste good? What, if
anything, do they show about duties regarding wild animals?
Taking an example what vegans says: Virtue ethicists agree that it is wrong to do anything a
virtuous person would not do or would not advise. Perhaps this forbids hurting and killing
animals, so any sort of animal farming is impermissible and so is hunting (Clark 1984;
Hursthouse 2011). Instead, so freerange farming is permissible and so is expert, pain-free
hunting (Scruton 2006b).
Fine if they says that impermissible to kill or hunting other hand for their own farming its
permissible to kill insects. Ok fine this is a logic less or a mind set words to me because for our
own desire we can eat anything we want that’s ture as vegan want to say to prove theirs.
So that’s why I don’t care I strongly don’t support veganism.

Conclusion:
A common belief is that there’s no point in a single individual going vegan, because retailers and
farms aren’t that sensitive to slight changes in demand, and so ultimately the same number of
animals will be bred. Personally, this idea was one of the biggest factors behind me not going
vegan for a long time. I completely sympathies with the argument and think it does apply to
some other similar decisions. But for veganism, it breaks down when you take a closer look.
Being vegan absolutely makes a difference, and there are two key ways to see this.
The expected value of not buying animal products
From the book Doing Good Better:
On many issues, I find that people hold the following two views:
If many people did this thing, then change would happen.
But any individual person doesn’t make a difference.
Holding that combination of views is usually a mistake when we consider expected value.
By researching this in detail, I am pretty sure being a pure vegan isn't the most healthy way to
go, simply because we didn't evolve this way.

As far as philosophy goes, I feel the idea of being a vegan for the purpose of not letting animals
suffer is flawed. How do we know vegetables don't suffer in some way that we don't quite
emphasize with? What about the millions of airborne microbes we injest accidentally every day?
If we don't really have good answers to those questions, what's the point of carrying out an ideal
halfway?

Mc mahan said. “You’re supposed to follow it even if it leads somewhere you

don’t want to go.”
Most of us are not like McMahan. We do not follow moral arguments if they lead to
uncomfortable conclusions. We prefer to make ethical decisions based on instinct, popular
wisdom, and whatever feels like the right response to a particular situation.
Consider ethical consumption, like switching to fair-trade coffee, or reducing how much meat
you buy. Suppose someone stops buying chicken breasts, instead choosing vegetarian options, in
order to reduce the amount of animal suffering on factory farms. Does that person make a
difference? You might think not. If one person decides against buying chicken breast one day but
the rest of the meat eaters on the planet continue to buy chicken, how could that possibly affect
how many chickens are killed for human consumptions? When a supermarket decides how much
chicken to buy, they don’t care that one fewer breast was purchased on a given day. However, if
thousands or millions of people stopped buying chicken breasts, the number of chickens raised
for food would decrease– supply would fall to meet demand.
The answer lies with expected value. If you decline to buy some chicken breast, then most of the
time you’ll make no difference: the supermarket will buy the same amount of chicken in the
future.
Finally, let’s clearly define the goal. We want to create a world in the future with as little cruelty
as possible towards animals used for food. In this world, most people who have the freedom to
do so should mainly eat either plants or products from animals that were well treated. Most of
these people will live in cities. They are not going to raise or hunt their own animals. So, anyone
who primarily eats meat from animals they raise or hunt isn’t helping achieve the goal. It doesn’t
matter how happy the animals were or how the environment is affected – it’s not a scalable
solution.