The Vegan Winter 1981

LETTERS MORAL DILEMMAS In the Spring issue of the "Vegan" Valerie Ruddenham posed the question "What would you have done?" and raised a number of moral dilemmas for vegans and for all those who care about animal suffering. In particular she pointed out that there are situations which do not seem to be black and white. For example, she described how she has had to smash in the skulls of animals that are suffering from incurable injuries; she said that she had chosen to give her diabetic dog injections of insulin derived from the pancreas of an ox; and she has used a cat to keep mice away from her house. She also described how she has been unable to criticise her father who has had both his hip joints replaced because of arthritis, an operation which was developed through animal experiments.

I would be most interested to read the comments Of others on this issue. My own view is that it is impossible to avoid such dilemmas, and accordingly there are no simple moral rules that one can stick to in all circumstances. I believe that one should choose the lesser evil, meaning by "lesser" that which causes the least suffering.

My view is a utilitarian one and I have been criticised for it by some people who otherwise support the general line that I take in my book "Animal Liberation". For example, in a more recent book, '^Practical Ethics", I wrote that one could imagine circumstances in which some animal experimentation was justified. The circumstances I had in mind were those in which it was quite clear that the amount of suffering prevented by the experiment would be much greater than the suffering caused. I think that this kind of case is almost certainly hypothetical since experiments on animals do not seem to produce such clearcut results. I do not think this view justifies much, if any, actual experimentation on animals. Nevertheless my position is clearly different from those who believe that all experimentation on animals, without any exceptions, actual or hypothetical is unjustifiable. What do your readers think?

Peter Singer T H E V I O L E N T SOCIETY Once the basic decision to eat animals is accepted by the average person all else follows. All animal abuses are accepted because that basic decision has been taken, that animals are objects and may be used, first and foremost by virtually everyone for food, and then following on from that rationale for everything and anything else... Change that basic decision, get the average citizen to go vegetarian, and eventually vegan, and you have a chance of righting all the other wrongs against animals.

Bob Pinkus 27