Pickett Susana
School of History, Politics and International Relations, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
J Agric Environ Ethics. 2021;34(3):15. doi: 10.1007/s10806-021-09857-0. Epub 2021 Apr 19.
Despite the strength of arguments for veganism in the animal rights literature, alongside environmental and other anthropocentric concerns posed by industrialised animal agriculture, veganism remains only a minority standpoint. In this paper, I explore the moral motivational problem of veganism from the perspectives of moral psychology and political false consciousness. I argue that a novel interpretation of the post-Marxist notion of political false consciousness may help to make sense of the widespread refusal to shift towards veganism. Specifically, the notion of false consciousness fills some explanatory gaps left by the moral psychological notion of , often understood to refer to a weakness of will. Central to my approach is the idea that animal exploitation is largely systemic and the assumption that moral motivation is inseparable from moral thinking. In this light, the primary obstacle to the adoption of veganism arises not so much from a failure to put genuine beliefs into action, but rather in a shared, distorted way of thinking about animals. Thus, common unreflective objections to veganism may be said to be manifestations of false consciousness.
尽管动物权利文献中支持纯素主义的论据有力,且工业化动物农业引发了环境及其他以人类为中心的问题,但纯素主义仍然只是少数人的立场。在本文中,我从道德心理学和政治虚假意识的角度探讨纯素主义的道德动机问题。我认为,对后马克思主义政治虚假意识概念的一种新颖解释可能有助于理解为何普遍存在拒绝转向纯素主义的现象。具体而言,虚假意识概念填补了道德心理学中常被理解为意志薄弱的“[此处原文缺失相关概念]”概念所留下的一些解释空白。我的方法的核心观点是,动物剥削在很大程度上是系统性的,以及道德动机与道德思考不可分割的假设。据此,采用纯素主义的主要障碍与其说是未能将真正的信念付诸行动,不如说是存在一种关于动物的共同的、扭曲的思维方式。因此,可以说对纯素主义常见的不假思索的反对意见是虚假意识的表现。