Skip to main content

Affected Ignorance And Animal Suffering: Why Our Failure To Debate Factory Farming Puts Us At Moral Risk

Abstract

It is widely recognized that our social and moral environments influence our actions and belief formations. We are never fully immune to the effects of cultural membership. What is not clear, however, is whether these influences excuse average moral agents who fail to scrutinize conventional norms. In this paper, I argue that the lack of extensive public debate about factory farming and, its corollary, extreme animal suffering, is probably due, in part, to affected ignorance. Although a complex phenomenon because of its many manifestations, affected ignorance is morally culpable because it involves a choice not to investigate whether some practice in which one participates in might be immoral. I contend further that James Montmarquet’s set of intellectual virtues can provide a positive account of what it means to act as a responsible moral agent while immersed in a meat eating culture; they also represent the moral and epistemic framework for the kind of public discourse that should be taking place.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Adams C. (2004), The Sexual Politics of Meat, New York: Continuum Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Amnesty International, Report on Torture (Duckworth, London, 1973)

  • Appleby M. C., J. A. Mench, B. O. Hughes (2004), Poultry Behavior and Welfare. Wallingford: CABI Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauston G., Battered Birds, Crated Herds: How We Treat the Animals We Eat (Farm Sanctuary, 1996)

  • Calhoun C. (1989). Responsibility and Reproach. Ethics 99(2):389–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costelloe T. (2003). The Invisibility of Evil: Moral Progress and the ‹Animal Holocaust.’ Philosophical Papers 32(2) 109–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisnitz G. (1997), Slaughterhouse: The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry. New York: Prometheus Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J., M. Ravizza (eds.) (1993), Perspectives on Moral Responsibility. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoagland S. (1993). Femininity, Resistance, and Sabotage. In M. Pearsall (ed.), Women and Values: Readings in Recent Feminist Philosophy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan L., R. Lawerence, P. Walker (2002). How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture. Environmental Health Perspectives 110(5):445–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ikuenobe P. (2004), Culture of Racism, Self-Respect, and Blameworthiness. Public Affairs Quarterly 18(1), 27–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, M., “Ex-Pig Farm Manager Charged With Cruelty.” The Washington Post, 9 September (2001)

  • Kestin S. C., T. G. Knowles, A. E. Tinch, N. G. Gregory (1992), Prevalence of Leg Weakness in Broiler Chickens and its Relationship with Genotype. Veterinary Record 131, 190–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy N. (2003), Cultural Membership and Moral Responsibility. The Monist 86(2), 145–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Lugones M. (1990), Structure/Antistructure and Agency Under Oppression. The Journal of Philosophy 87(10), 502–515

    Google Scholar 

  • Moody-Adams M. (1994), Culture, Responsibility, and Affected Ignorance. Ethics 104, 291–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montmarquet J. (1993), Epistemic Virtue and Doxastic Responsibility. Lanham: Rowan & Littlefield

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan T. (2004), Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights. Maryland: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Schonfeld, V. and M. Alaux, The Animals’ Film (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, 1981)

  • Singer P. (2001), Animal Liberation. New York: Harper Perennial

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer P., J. Mason (2006), The Ethics of What We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter. USA: Rodale Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Slote M. (1982). Is Virtue Possible? Analysis, 42, 70–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speigel M. (1996), The Dreaded Comparison: Human and Animal Slavery. New York: Mirror Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver S. A., M. C. Morris (2004), Science, Pigs, and Politics: A New Zealand Perspective on the Banning of Sow Stalls. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17, 51–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weeks C. A., A. Butterworth (2004), Measuring and Auditing Broiler Welfare. Wallingford: CABI Publishing

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to Wofford College for awarding me a summer research grant in order to complete this project. I would also like to thank the six anonymous referees for providing me with extensive and helpful comments and suggestions on earlier versions of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy M. Williams.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Williams, N.M. Affected Ignorance And Animal Suffering: Why Our Failure To Debate Factory Farming Puts Us At Moral Risk. J Agric Environ Ethics 21, 371–384 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-008-9087-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-008-9087-8

Keywords

  • affected ignorance
  • animal suffering
  • cultural membership
  • factory farming
  • intellectual virtues
  • meat eating
  • moral ignorance
  • responsibility