On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
nottoohuman
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:00 pm
Diet: Vegan

On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by nottoohuman »

Hello

For those interested, here is a link to an essay I recently wrote on the inherent problems of framing "veganism" as a philosophy or theory and not as a tool for enacting a philosophy or theory. Thoughts welcome.

https://medium.com/@jonathandickstein/rethink-your-understanding-of-veganism-39413185742

"My point is that any presentation of veganism as a philosophical theory is excessively flawed and ultimately indefensible. For the animal justice movement, the term veganism is only productive as a description of how anti-speciesism manifests in daily life. By confining veganism to a conduct-descriptive role, advocates enhance the visibility of anti-speciesism and thereby work to rectify the routine marginalization and exclusion of animal justice from social justice discourse."

All the best,
Jonathan
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by brimstoneSalad »

nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pm "My point is that any presentation of veganism as a philosophical theory is excessively flawed and ultimately indefensible.
Is chemistry not science unless it speculates on the unified field theorem?

We can say that veganism is not any single complete philosophy (that it's not a school of philosophy, for example), but more of a conclusion that can be arrived at through several different lines of thought, but when we examine the framing more closely there are suggestions of it being consequentialist in nature.

https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism
(See the long definition)
"A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."
It's far sighted, looks to material benefits, and is pragmatic.

Reading more on the page we can see more indications of pragmatic consequentialism:
Currently all medicine in the UK must be tested on animals before it is deemed safe for human use, but please note: The Vegan Society DOES NOT recommend you avoid medication prescribed to you by your doctor - a dead vegan is no good to anyone!


nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmFor the animal justice movement, the term veganism is only productive as a description of how anti-speciesism manifests in daily life.
I think the problem is you're looking for a deontological definition.
I recommend reading this thread: http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?t=785
Deontology itself is a debunked philosophy, so you're going to find contradictions whenever you look for compatible ideas.
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmBy confining veganism to a conduct-descriptive role
It isn't just conduct descriptive. It's goal oriented and illustrates certain values.
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmadvocates enhance the visibility of anti-speciesism and thereby work to rectify the routine marginalization and exclusion of animal justice from social justice discourse.
I don't think veganism has anything to do with social justice. Veganism is about morality, plain and simple. Animals don't need to be part of our social circles to be sentient and deserve moral consideration.
nottoohuman
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:00 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by nottoohuman »

First, I just want to ask, did you read the linked essay? I'm asking because some (perhaps not all) of your concerns will be clarified therein.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by brimstoneSalad »

nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:19 pm First, I just want to ask, did you read the linked essay? I'm asking because some (perhaps not all) of your concerns will be clarified therein.
I was addressing what you posted here. I think I showed why that conclusion is wrong based on the Vegan Society definition.
If you like, you can post the essay here, or quotes from it that you think address my points. It's best to keep the whole discussion accessible on the forum. :)
nottoohuman
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:00 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by nottoohuman »

I address the TVS definition throughout the essay. Please go to this link and read the piece, as it is too long to copy and paste here. Include whatever sections you think my help. (https://medium.com/@jonathandickstein/rethink-your-understanding-of-veganism-39413185742) . I also contacted TVS directly and they were unable to clarify the use of "philosophy" in their definition.

Regarding your final three comments:

>I think the problem is you're looking for a deontological definition.

I myself am surely not "looking for a deontological definition." However, there exist many deontologist and virtue ethicist vegans. Consequentialism is not the only normative theory that leads to, or better yet, employs veganism. I say "employ" because veganism is a tool to actualize the theory, not the theory itself. If veganism advertises itself as an "ethical stance about minimizing harm," not only will deontologist and virtue ethicist vegans simply disagree, but the definition is basically synonymous with utilitarianism. That won't work. Moreover, while you and I may reject these other alternative normative theories, it doesn't mean that their adoption of "veganism" is unjustified.

>It's goal oriented and illustrates certain values.

The exact same goals for all vegans? The exact same values?

>I don't think veganism has anything to do with social justice. Veganism is about morality, plain and simple

In the line you quote from my initial post, nowhere do I say veganism is itself about social justice. I said that anti-speciesism is an area of social justice and veganism is a tool to work for that justice. Using veganism to fight against anti-speciesism is what morality demands. Veganism can and is used to address other moral issues as well.
User avatar
NonZeroSum
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:30 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: North Wales, UK

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by NonZeroSum »

Really interesting article, reminded me of a situationist essay that had a big effect on the anarchist movement at the turn of the millennium. Probably the opposite thesis to DxE, but a similarly great break down on terms, advocacy and prescriptions:
There is a lot of discussion on the forum about best usage and application of terms, depending on goals like how much focus on reducitarian and abolition, scope you see veganism playing in a larger school of philosophy etc.

Will chip in some more later.

Here's some formatting to help with the process of this discussion:

________
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pm . . .the inherent problems of framing "veganism" as a philosophy or theory and not as a tool for enacting a philosophy or theory.
Rethink Your Understanding of Veganism
Animal justice advocates can’t rely on veganism to communicate animal oppression as a social justice issue.
https://medium.com/@jonathandickstein/rethink-your-understanding-of-veganism-39413185742

In 2009, Direct Action Everywhere co-founder Wayne Hsiung disseminated “Boycott veganism,” a provocative essay claiming that the prioritization of veganism in animal justice advocacy is harmful to the animal justice movement. The piece confronts not the practice of veganism but rather its centrality in outreach. Hsiung omits an interrogation of the concept of veganism itself, though he adds that veganism is “inherently confused,” with its “bewildering number of definitions and motivations” hindering the formulation of a unified “vegan message.” While Hsiung is correct that the lack of defintional unanimity is a problem, that’s not the inherent problem of veganism. The inherent problem, which only adds to public confusion, is veganism’s incoherence when trafficked as a philosophical theory, as a type of message transcending behavioral guidelines.

My point is that any presentation of veganism as a philosophical theory is excessively flawed and ultimately indefensible. For the animal justice movement, the term veganism is only productive as a description of how anti-speciesism manifests in daily life. By confining veganism to a conduct-descriptive role, advocates enhance the visibility of anti-speciesism and thereby work to rectify the routine marginalization and exclusion of animal justice from social justice discourse.
_________
brimstoneSalad wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:15 pmWe can say that veganism is not any single complete philosophy (that it's not a school of philosophy, for example), but more of a conclusion that can be arrived at through several different lines of thought, but when we examine the framing more closely there are suggestions of it being consequentialist in nature.
_________
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmI address the TVS definition throughout the essay. . . I also contacted TVS directly and they were unable to clarify the use of "philosophy" in their definition.
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pm
brimstoneSalad wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:15 pm
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmFor the animal justice movement, the term veganism is only productive as a description of how anti-speciesism manifests in daily life.
I think the problem is you're looking for a deontological definition.
I myself am surely not "looking for a deontological definition." However, there exist many deontologist and virtue ethicist vegans. Consequentialism is not the only normative theory that leads to, or better yet, employs veganism. I say "employ" because veganism is a tool to actualize the theory, not the theory itself. If veganism advertises itself as an "ethical stance about minimizing harm," not only will deontologist and virtue ethicist vegans simply disagree, but the definition is basically synonymous with utilitarianism. That won't work. Moreover, while you and I may reject these other alternative normative theories, it doesn't mean that their adoption of "veganism" is unjustified.
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pm
brimstoneSalad wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:15 pm
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmBy confining veganism to a conduct-descriptive role
It's goal oriented and illustrates certain values.
The exact same goals for all vegans? The exact same values?
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pm
brimstoneSalad wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:15 pm
nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:07 pmadvocates enhance the visibility of anti-speciesism and thereby work to rectify the routine marginalization and exclusion of animal justice from social justice discourse.
I don't think veganism has anything to do with social justice. Veganism is about morality, plain and simple
In the line you quote from my initial post, nowhere do I say veganism is itself about social justice. I said that anti-speciesism is an area of social justice and veganism is a tool to work for that justice. Using veganism to fight against anti-speciesism is what morality demands. Veganism can and is used to address other moral issues as well.
__________________
Vegan Society wrote:History

Although the vegan diet was defined early on in The Vegan Society's beginnings in 1944, it was as late as 1949 before Leslie J Cross pointed out that the society lacked a definition of veganism. He suggested “[t]he principle of the emancipation of animals from exploitation by man”. This is later clarified as “to seek an end to the use of animals by man for food, commodities, work, hunting, vivisection, and by all other uses involving exploitation of animal life by man”.

When The Vegan Society became a registered charity in 1979, the Memorandum and Articles of Association updated the definition of “veganism” as:
A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.
Vegan Society wrote:Why does The Vegan Society not support single-issue campaigns?

We believe all animals have a right to life and freedom and deserve to be valued as individuals. Respect for life means an end to all animal (ab)use, not just rights for some. We focus on a pro-intersectional approach which upholds human rights, as well as non-human animal rights. To progress as a movement, we advocate recognition of the intersections of injustice. We seek to promote effective dialogue between anti-oppression movements so we can work together for social justice.
Last edited by NonZeroSum on Sat Aug 19, 2017 5:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Unofficial librarian of vegan and socialist movement media.
PhiloVegan Wiki: https://tinyurl.com/y7jc6kh6
Vegan Video Library: https://tinyurl.com/yb3udm8x
Ishkah YouTube: https://youtube.com/Ishkah
nottoohuman
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:00 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by nottoohuman »

Thanks for all that NonZeroSum, especially the formatting. I just joined and am getting my bearings. I will also definitely look at the links you shared.
User avatar
NonZeroSum
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:30 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: North Wales, UK

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by NonZeroSum »

nottoohuman wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2017 9:26 pm Thanks for all that NonZeroSum, especially the formatting. I just joined and am getting my bearings. I will also definitely look at the links you shared.
No problemo :)

Forgot to say welcome! You can post an introduction post if you like to tell us more about how you went vegan and your day to day interests, favorite reading and philosophy, etc.

How do you find medium as a writing platform? Is there much crossover of discussion with the different medium creators and readers? I got a wordpress a while ago to follow a bunch of interesting activist and travel blogs and turned it into a small online library when zinelibrary.info closed down.

Ok so more thoughts:

I'm reading from brimstoneSalad something along the lines of that they would like this definition to be the sales pitch people first read when they look up the definition because it's the one that is going to be most effective, so even if people come to veganism from different ethical schools, this is still the most rational definition.

You both agree that the longer Vegan Society definition is wholly consequentialist.

nottoohuman would have prefered the vegan society definition of veganism to read something like this:
Veganism is a way of living that excludes, as far as is practicable, all use and consumption of animals and animal products.
tobiasleenaert (TheVeganStrategist) has a new book out where they propose changing the definition also, but to something more open to mostly vegan/reducitarians.

Personally I'm sold that shorter is sweeter, we do need practical in there and if exploitation was chucked out that would just make freegan a more distinct identity, we want people to distinguish using animal products not from exploitation 'as eating freegan' anyway because of the not economically productive novelty of it.

But more importantly than the exact phrasing of definitions and whether it's worth petitioning the vegan society to change slightly, are terms that people try to replicate from them when explaining veganism to new people. Is it right for someone to talk about veganism as only being a consumer lifestyle with the only philosophical aim to have more vegan consumer choices out compete in the market, that would be a clear hell no from many.

The article posted goes into TVS use of the terms lifestyle, way of life and philosophy. I've brought up their use of pro-intersectional. I like the idea of people being clear that veganism can be arrived at from many schools of philosophy and none e.g. health. When I'm introducing veganism to people I think of it like bullet points that the person is most to least likely to have heard of and misconceptions to dispel along the way:

1. We don't use animal products; freegan is cool too.
2. As far as practicable; medicine, food deserts, disordered eating, etc.
3. Way of life/habit/positive constraint that can open up new experiences like learning new tastes/cooking, to looking after your health better.
4. How veganism fits into my philosophy, the type of society I want to live in, and how it can be arrived at in other schools of philosophy or not and why that is.
Unofficial librarian of vegan and socialist movement media.
PhiloVegan Wiki: https://tinyurl.com/y7jc6kh6
Vegan Video Library: https://tinyurl.com/yb3udm8x
Ishkah YouTube: https://youtube.com/Ishkah
nottoohuman
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 12:00 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by nottoohuman »

NonZeroSum:
First, regarding Medium, I can't stay very much at this point. It was my first post there after posting more on Wordpress. I do seem to prefer it though, if only as a first impression.

Also, you raise some very interesting points. For now I would like focus on this though: "Is it right for someone to talk about veganism as only being a consumer lifestyle with the only philosophical aim to have more vegan consumer choices out compete in the market, that would be a clear hell no from many."

I think this statement would make more sense if we substitute "anti-speciesism"/ "animal justice" for "veganism". Then I too would voice that "Hell No." My point is that we shouldn't be talking about veganism as being "about" anything at all. In my framing it is simply a tool, a type of conduct, just as freeganism can be viewed as such. They are tools for for acting morally, especially though not solely with respect to nonhuman animals.
User avatar
NonZeroSum
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:30 am
Diet: Vegan
Location: North Wales, UK

Re: On the Limitations of "Veganism"

Post by NonZeroSum »

nottoohuman wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:33 pm My point is that we shouldn't be talking about veganism as being "about" anything at all. In my framing it is simply a tool, a type of conduct, just as freeganism can be viewed as such. They are tools for for acting morally, especially though not solely with respect to nonhuman animals.
Yes nothing against anyone that uses veganism as that tool, just not useful to define it for everyone else as about any one philosophy.
Unofficial librarian of vegan and socialist movement media.
PhiloVegan Wiki: https://tinyurl.com/y7jc6kh6
Vegan Video Library: https://tinyurl.com/yb3udm8x
Ishkah YouTube: https://youtube.com/Ishkah
Post Reply