Hi guys, for Philosophy at school we are currently studying the issue of eating meat. For our assessment task we have to write a dialogue discussing one particular aspect of eating meat, and as the unoriginal I am, I chose the topic of animal cruelty. Anyway, I have come to a point where a found an argument from the vegan point of view that I was unable to refute, and since I find it highly unlikely that I have found a silver bullet in the issue of eating meat I have turned to the internet in order to obtain a response, anyway here is what I have so far:

Scott: Welcome Daniel, I’m glad you could join me tonight.
Daniel: Thank you Scott, I’m glad to be here.
Scott: If you would not mind, I would like to discuss the morality of eating meat, and more specifically: the issue of animal cruelty. I understand that you that you do not believe eating animals is an immoral practice; nor do you think that the eating of domestic farm animals can be considered as cruel; is this correct?
Daniel: I can assure you that you are correct in your understanding.
Scott: Thank you for your confirmation. As I see fit there are two key issues to examine when examining whether or not eating domesticated farm animals can be considered cruel.
1) The first of which is whether or not there is anything inherently wrong with killing life for food. Is there any inherent value within life?
2) The second issue (and owing to time constraints, this is the one I wish to discuss) is whether or not animals are treated cruelly in order for us to obtain our food.
Would you agree with me that these are the two main issues? The life of a domestic farm animal is an undoubtedly miserable one. As livestock you are seen entirely as a source of revenue, the entire purpose of your life is to gain weight and (if applicable) produce commercial products (e.g. eggs and milk). To highlight this issue, I would like to discuss the life of a typical domestic pig:
- Pigs are left in dark rooms for nearly 24 hours a day .
- Pigs live most of their lives on grids; this causes them to have foot injuries1.
- Pigs spend most of their life in extremely confined spaces, causing them to stress and chew on the rails of their cages1.
Animal cruelty in farms extends far beyond this; chickens too will never see the light of day, suffer from bone diseases and will lose many of their feathers ; and if a doe does not produce seven litters in a year they are killed (this means there is a replacement rate of 90%)1.
It is clear to me that typical treatment of a domestic farm animal is appalling, if humans were subjected to these conditions it would be considered abuse. Would you agree that such treatment could not be considered ethical?
Daniel: I do indeed agree that this is not ethical; however the problem here is that such treatment need not be the case; pigs and chickens could be farmed in open environments, while does could simply not be culled for a low production rate. The problems are there, but so are the solutions, we need not consider a practice unethical if it needn’t be unethical.
Scott: Daniel, while I do admire your optimism, I do not think your approach is realistic. The amount of meat we consume requires such unethical treatment of livestock, meat prices would raise significantly if farmers needed to own more land. If pigs didn’t live on grids the conditions would be considered unsanitary, and the human population would have to significantly decrease its consumption of meat if we were to adopt these new conditions.
Additionally, laws removing such practices would be nigh impossible to enforce, farming is one of Australia’s biggest industries and it would be extremely difficult to ‘catch’ all those who broke these laws. Your position Daniel is idealistic, but not realistic; so many problems need to be solved if we are to adopt more ethical practices. How can you justify such a view when it is so unlikely to occur?
Daniel: Indeed Scott I understand your scepticism, but we must always be trying to solve our problems, regardless of how difficult it may seem.
Scott: But surely it is not worth the time when we can simply not eat meat? There are many more reasons arguments against shouldn’t eat meat, eating of meat can have severe health issues, and the environmental consequences are disastrous! Would it not be easier to simply cease eating meat?

Of course if you notice any errors with spelling, grammar etc. corrections would be appreciated!
Jack

As I see fit there are two key issues to examine when examining whether or not eating domesticated farm animals can be considered cruel.
1) The first of which is whether or not there is anything inherently wrong with killing life for food. Is there any inherent value within life?
2) The second issue (and owing to time constraints, this is the one I wish to discuss) is whether or not animals are treated cruelly in order for us to obtain our food.

Advice:

1. Chuck out the conversation as a device - it is clumsy and amateurish. If you want to be taken seriously, write seriously.
2. Be your own editor. You re-read it, sloooooowly.
3. Dude, your work is 90% rhetoric. Only 10% was factual - the conditions of modern farming. Reverse this ratio or it will stay sounding like a drunken hipster rant instead of a scholarly essay.
4. Define what a moral actually is where it resides and what things cannot have morals. The remainder must have morals.
5. Define what suffering is, where it resides, and what things cannot suffer. The remainder must be able to suffer.
6. Define what cruelty is, where exactly resides, and how is it measure.
7. Take your farm yard stories and apply the definitions.
8. State if the animals are suffering, whether there are specific cruelties, and is there a consequential immorality being committed.

The above will give you a rudimentary and shallow treatment of a fraught subject. However, that is all you can do in 500 words. It would take ten times that to be able to present the dilemmas of "competing moralities," and how you could judge a winner.

Hope this helps. Good luck

O.K, thanks to Iconoclast's suggestions I have made the following revision:

Scott: Welcome Daniel, I’m glad you could join me tonight.
Daniel: Thank you Scott, I’m glad to be here.
Scott: If you would not mind, I would like to discuss the morality of eating meat, and more specifically: the issue of animal cruelty. I understand that you that you do not believe eating animals is an immoral practice; nor do you think that the eating of domestic farm animals can be considered as cruel; is this correct?
Daniel: I can assure you that you are correct in your understanding.
Scott: Thank you for your confirmation. As I see fit there are two key issues to examine when examining whether or not eating domesticated farm animals can be considered cruel.
1) The first of which is whether or not there is anything inherently wrong with killing life[plants?] for food. Is there any inherent value within life?[animals?]
2) The second issue (and owing to time constraints, this[remove] is the one I wish to discuss) is whether or not animals are treated cruelly in order for us to obtain our food.
But, before we proceed may I ask how you define both suffering and cruelty.
Daniel: I define suffering as any negative emotion; and cruelty is the forcing of suffering upon others for little or no later gain.
Scott: Excellent, then we agree on this issue. So let me ask you this: If a farm animal was forced into feeling suffering you would define it as cruel, correct?
Daniel: Indeed I would.
Scott: Wonderful, then please consider the life of a typical domestic pig:
- Pigs are left in dark rooms for nearly 24 hours a day .
- Pigs live most of their lives on grids; this causes them to have foot injuries1.
- Pigs spend most of their life in extremely confined spaces, causing them to stressbecome stressed and chew on the rails of their cages1.
Animal cruelty in farms extends far beyond this; [:]chickens suffer from bone diseases and are placed in extremely enclosed environments ; and if a rabbit does not produce seven litters in a year they are killed (this means there is a replacement rate of 90%)1.
It is clear to me that typical treatment of a domestic farm animal is appalling, if humans were subjected to these conditions it would be considered abuse[cruel? Keep to the main words]. Would you agree that these animals being forced to suffer?
Daniel: I do indeed agree that this treatment is cruel; however the problem here is that such treatment need not be the case; pigs and chickens could be farmed in open environments, while rabbits could simply not be culled for a low production rate. The problems are there, but so are the solutions, we need not consider a practice unethical if it needn’t be unethical.
Scott: Daniel, while I do admire your optimism, you seem to be ignoring that this isn’t in fact the case. We could make all domestic livestock free range, we could let pigs live on grass and not grids, but we don’t. Even if we did the economical consequences would be enormous [Is that really true? It might add 20% to the food budget which is itself about 15% of GDP. With growth at 4% it would be a drag on the economy of only 9 months.]. Farm output would significantly decrease, the new living conditions of pigs would be considered unsanitary as they would be living in their own excrement, meat prices would sky rocket[avoid colloquialisms], and humans would have to eat significantly less meat. You’re right, the problems are there, and it seems that not eating is the only solution.
Daniel: But we do have a choice, we can buy free range eggs, we can eat non-hormonally induced meat. Surely if we eat only these products it isn’t cruel.
Scott: But there are many more issues than simply whether the chicken lived in a free range environment or whether the cattle were given growth hormones. What I gave earlier was only an incredibly small sample of abuse of animals in farm; countless more examples of cruelty can easily be found online. But above all, why should all this matter when we can simply * not eat meat? There are more arguments against the eating of meat, ranging from health based to environmental ones. Wouldn’t it be easier to not eat meat?

* Individuals could "simply" adopt all manner of more responsible behaviours, but they do not. Human beings DO NOT make many rational decisions. Drinking, unprotected sex, internet posting, driving 200 km/hr, getting fat. Mostly it is instinct - like eating meat. I for one do not intend to stop eating meat because animals taste too bloody good.

why dont you trot off to Animal Farm (I can provide address) and ask them their opinions re eating meat?

If it is okay for lions and tigers to eat humans then why can't we eat animals in return?

Because for lions and tigers meat is an essential part of one's diet. With humans however this is not the case, as there is in fact a negative correlation with eating meat and life expectancy.

But is it because of the meat or the rest of diet and lifestyle? small amounts of healthy meat a few times a week won't do any harm.

It might not do any self-harm if eaten in moderation, but is certainly won't do any good; whereas for a carnivore it will.

With humans however this is not the case, as there is in fact a negative correlation with eating meat and life expectancy.