The ‘secret’ of killing animals

Abstract

The basic question of this talk would be the one if phenomenology can contribute to awareness of ‘meat production’ regarding especially citizen’s responsibility in dealing with and possibly changing current conditions. Therefore I will describe the notion of a problematic but unsolved inconsistency in the treatment of different (but similar) animals in current animal ethics and in our society. But we know that for a long time – why didn’t we change our practices rationally yet? I will recur on phenomenology as method to reveal structures of normatively relevant significances qua ‘matters of concern’ (Latour, 2004: 231). These structures constitute our views on animals and their differences for us – there is no animal per se, thus, radical consistency and equality is something utopian. Although ethical considerations have to proceed from a diversity of practices and thus different treatments, there is also one fundamental structure behind all our experiences of animals: their vulnerability (Negative Integrity, to be explained in the abstract) which constitutes a moral demand that cannot not be answered. But this vulnerability is hidden in meat production (and lab experimentation); we perceive – under current conditions – rarely what happened before we grab the packed meat in the shelf. The citizen’s responsibility is thus a critical distance to our practices deriving from an enabled experience of animals reified and instrumentalized (although vulnerable) in meat production. The consequence would not be an equal, but at least a more humane treatment by altering our practices. Our practices are always tied to a practical tradition (and tradition of experience). So they cannot be altered radically instantly (as Regan, Singer and others would demand from us) – but they can be changed proceeding from the normalities we live in.