Since coming off anti-depressants I’ve basically found myself back where I was twenty years ago without any medicinal or recreational ways of moderating the thoughts and emotions that run or rather, rampage through my brain like unfettered children who have been informed that they can break everything in the bungalow. This has given rise to many thoughts and awarenesses (if I may coin a new term) some expected and some quite unexpected.
One such unexpected thought pattern I have recognised is that I have found myself considering vegetarianism. I last thought of this when I was around fifteen years old. I can’t tell you why I even thought of it, but I can tell you my consideration of it didn’t last very long. I really like the taste of meat, and I do recognise a drop in energy levels when I forgo red meat for longer than a week. Now however, I find myself considering it quite seriously. I have no doubt that this has at least in part been inspired by the (limited) reading I’ve done in recent years of work by the likes of Peter Singer and Tom Regan. I find it difficult to fault their logic for the most part, thus I like the way these guys think and present their points. So in a Singer-esque, utilitarian way I find myself asking ‘Why does a suicidal nobody like me have any right to consume a meat product at the cost of the life of a creature which has the capacity to suffer?’
But all life is meaningless is it not? Well yes it is (more on that in another blog sometime!). However, I’m not convinced that the meaninglessness of existence precludes the minimisation of suffering during the course of said meaningless existence.
Of course it's not just about what I put in my mouth. A utilitarian minimisation of suffering must needs the consideration of sentient wellbeing in all forms of consumption. So where does this lead me on the use of other animal products such as leather for shoes or upholstery? Good question. For some reason my mind instantly leans toward the longer term appreciation of these products giving rise to a greater legitimacy when weighed against the value of suffering. Of course this doesn't even resemble a sound argument, this is just my gut reaction. (We might say that I'm adopting a dialectic approach, rather than hard logic on this topic). Generally I consume meat in at least one meal each day. This is far more than necessary, and more to the point: it is thoughtless. It’s quite probable that within a week I will cease recalling that experience of said meat product, thus the creature and its life, the memory of its life, and the appreciation of the life it gave for my meal are all forgotten. Comparatively, with a favourite pair of leather boots, I can pause occasionally and think of the animal that they came from, I can be thankful for that and remember.
Perhaps what I am saying is that I feel an obligation to minimise suffering especially when I balance the suffering of animals for the production of goods and food, against my own suicidal state, and that by choosing not to eat meat, I am doing something to reduce the suffering of animals, and I’m also reducing the overwhelming sense of ‘undeserving’ that I battle with daily (e.g. ‘I don’t deserve the food this animal died for' or 'I am a waste of this animal’s life’).
Eventually, I must consider the old practicality argument. To be honest, in my current state, it’s a marvel that I’m thinking of the wellbeing of others at all. Perhaps adopting a vegetarian diet is a little beyond me right now, but minimising my intake of meat is possible. Insofar as something is better than nothing, I am consciously reducing my use of products which cause suffering in sentient beings. In the meantime, whilst using products which animals gave their lives for, I will be thankful and I will remember.
No comments:
Post a Comment