Rupert wrote:
> On Dec 27, 7:50 am, ex-PFC Wintergreen >
> wrote:
>> Despite all the fancy pseudo-philosophical rhetoric, "veganism" isn't
>> really about ethics. It's about smug self-satisfaction and sanctimony.
>> There is no valid ethics in "veganism" at all. It isn't at all about
>> identifying a moral and right course of action and then following it;
>> it's only about self-exaltation over a completely phony issue.
>>
>> "vegans" have never shown, and never will be able to show, that it is
>> unethical for humans to consume animal-derived products.
>
> What's the fallacy in this argument?
>
> http://www.uta.edu/philosophy/facult...20( 2000).pdf

The fallacy is non sequitur: he builds what he thinks is a compelling
case against factory farming, then makes the unwarranted leap that *all*
meat consumption is immoral.

Along the way, he belabors the same old, tired, inapplicable garbage
about resource "inefficiency", which, as we have seen, is nonsense.

The sophistry of guys like this is simply staggering. They have a
position to which they've leapt, and then they try to backfill the
yawning chasm behind them.