academicNovember 9, 2019
The humanity of what we eat: Conceptions of human uniqueness among vegetarians and omnivores
Studies on dehumanization demonstrated that denying certain human characteristics might serve as a strategy for moral disengagement. Meat consumption—especially in the times of cruel animal farming—is related to the exclusion of animals from the human scope of justice. In the present research, it was hypothesized that the conception of human uniqueness (denying animals certain psychological characteristics) might be a strategy of meat‐eaters’ moral disengagement.
Studies on dehumanization demonstrated that denying certain human
characteristics might serve as a strategy for moral disengagement. Meat
consumption---especially in the times of cruel animal farming---is
related to the exclusion of animals from the human scope of justice. In
the present research, it was hypothesized that the conception of human
uniqueness (denying animals certain psychological characteristics) might
be a strategy of meat‐eaters' moral disengagement. Three studies
compared the extent to which vegetarians and omnivores attribute
psychological characteristics to humans versus animals. In Study 1,
vegetarian participants ascribed more secondary (uniquely human)
emotions to animals than did the omnivores; however, there were no
differences in primary (animalistic) emotions. Study 2 showed that
omnivores distinguish human characteristics from animalistic ones more
sharply than vegetarians do, while both groups do not differ in
distinguishing human characteristics from mechanistic ones. Study 3
confirmed the results by showing that omnivores ascribed less secondary
emotions to traditionally edible animals than to the non‐edible species,
while vegetarians did not differentiate these animals. These results
support the claim that the lay conceptions of 'human uniqueness' are
strategies of moral disengagement.