argument top image

Is eating dog meat immoral? Show more Show less
Back to question

The consumption of dog meat is legal in most countries and is notably part of Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Swiss, and Nigerian cuisine. However, dog meat is heavily tabooed in Europe and the Americas. In recent years, animal activist groups have fought for the practice to be banned on moral grounds.

No, eating dog meat is not immoral Show more Show less

For some, dog meat is just another food source, potentially with cultural and religious connotations surrounding consumption. The notion that eating dog meat is immoral stems from a Western cultural viewpoint. Imposing this on cultures where there is no moral wrong-doing, typically in Eastern countries, upholds cultural superiority.
(1 of 4) Next position >

The practice of eating dog meat often originates from famine

Dog meat as a food source is usually an idea and action that comes into existence during times of famine. Dogs were both guardians for livestock and emergency food sources when food started to get scarce. While western culture dislikes the idea of it its still a popular food in eastern countries.

The Argument

Many cuisines that have turned into comfort foods originate from times of famine and rationing. With the lack of ingredients at their disposal people had to start getting creative with making their food stretch or find new ways to make ends meet. Every culture has a few of these dishes in their recipe book, even if they don’t realize it. In America, lobsters are some of the most expensive seafood you can get at a fancy restaurant but they didn’t always used to be so popular. In the past lobster used to be considered poverty food and even jails weren't allowed to serve it more than a couple times a week. With it being a costal food though and the invention of the railroad, people were able to market it as a unique food item. After a bit of time and some rising popularity, the poor man's meal was turned into the luxury dish people see it as today. [1] While in Western cultures there's a strong distaste towards eating what's considered a companion animal, with Eastern cultures that's not the case. Dog meat is their lobster that originated in famine turned into quite a delicacy to eat and share with friends either over a round of drinks or during a celebration. Just like with dog meat, from some perspectives it’s seen as ‘the cockroach of the sea’ while for others it’s not just a meal but a delicious luxury one.

Counter arguments

As second world countries like China and Vietnam are evolving so are their ideas on what is moral and immoral. As the country evolves so does what is at disposal of the people, not just trade but infrastructure and even the economy. When these things build up people gain more opportunities to benefit themselves and their families, which in turn gives the allowance of luxuries. Not just time but things and these luxuries include raising and owning pets. Dogs had always been considered guards but as pets they’re more than that and it’s become quite a common phrase for pet owners to refer to them even as their children or their ‘fur babies.’ While they have been used for food during times of poverty, as poverty decreases and pet ownership increases the distaste towards dog meat also increases. Countries that lack famine lack the need for what people consider poverty foods and as these countries continue to grow it's becomes a question of whether such a food will take on the title of a childhood dish, a luxury meal, or historical food item that's now obsolete.[2]

Proponents

Premises

[P1] Foods formed in times of famine often have sentimental value to those who have eaten it which have, in turn, popularized and increased the demand for the dish.

Rejecting the premises

References

  1. https://www.history.com/news/a-taste-of-lobster-history
  2. https://awionline.org/dogmeat

Vote

Not sure yet? Read more ↑

Discuss

This page was last edited on Tuesday, 15 Sep 2020 at 19:42 UTC

Explore related arguments