Human diets and animal welfare: The illogic of the larder

ABSTRACT. Few moral arguments have been made against vegetarian diets. One exception is the ‘‘Logic of the Larder:’ ’ We do animals a favor by purchasing their meat, eggs, and milk, for if we did not purchase these products, fewer animals would exist. This argument fails because many farm animals have lives that are probably not worth living, while others prevent a significant number of wild animals from existing. Even if this were not so, the purchase of animal products uses resources that could otherwise be used to bring a much greater number of animals into existence. KEY WORDS: animal welfare, farm animals, utilitarianism, vegetarianism, wildlife It may be a credit to vegetarian diets that ethical arguments against them are difficult to find. One of the few exceptions is an argument sometimes called ‘‘The Logic of the Larder’ ’ (LL): We do animals a favor by purchasing meat, eggs, and milk, for if we did not purchase these products, fewer animals would exist (Stephen, 1896). LL results from the common notion that the supply of farm animals roughly follows the demand for their products; and the less common notion that the world is made better off by having more animals in existence. The Logic of the Larder has a long history. Two of the most famous proponents of vegetarianism tried to knock the argument down (Salt, 1914; Singer, 1999) but variants of LL continue to be defended by several notabl