Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics

Living Edition
| Editors: Paul B. Thompson, David M. Kaplan

Ethics and Food Taste

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_70-8

Synonyms

Introduction

When people choose what to eat, one of the main reasons is the taste of the food. Many people in the world do not have much choice in their diets given their poverty, but in the Western world, the average consumer enjoys an overwhelming variety of affordable foods. The focus of this entry is the role of taste in the food choices of those who do have a choice. With more choices comes more responsibility; deciding what to eat has a moral dimension as well since food choices have an enormous impact on the agent’s health, the environment, and the well-being of other humans and animals.

The core puzzle posed by taste is its involvement in the most common and ubiquitous cases of what look like weakness of will. Many people find certain foods morally bad because of their presumed or genuinely harmful consequences. For example, one might intend to become a...

Keywords

Moral Reason Food Choice Moral Agency Moral Belief Moral Property 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Arpaly, N. (2000). On acting rationally against one’s best judgment. Ethics, 110(3), 488–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auvray, M., & Spence, C. (2008). The multisensory perception of flavor. Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 1016–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Basu, S., Yoffe, P., Hills, N., & Lustig, R. H. (2013). The relationship of sugar to population-level diabetes prevalence: An econometric analysis of repeated cross-sectional data. PLoS One, 8(2), e57873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cafaro, P. J., Primack, R. B., & Zimdahl, R. L. (2006). The fat of the land: Linking American food overconsumption, obesity, and biodiversity loss. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19, 541–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Crowe, F. L., Appleby, P. N., Travis, R. C., & Key, T. J. (2013). Risk of hospitalization or death from ischemic heart disease among British vegetarians and nonvegetarians: Results from the EPIC-Oxford cohort study. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 97, 597–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hare, R. M. (1952). The language of morals. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  7. Hills, P. (2000). Appreciating whisky: A connoisseur’s guide to nosing, tasting, and appreciating scotch. Glasgow: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  8. Korsmeyer, C. (2012). Ethical gourmandism. In D. M. Kaplan (Ed.), The philosophy of food. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Logue, A. W. (2004). The psychology of eating and drinking. New York: Brunner-Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. McMichael, A. J., Powles, J. W., Butler, C. D., & Uauy, R. (2007). Food, livestock production, energy, climate change, and health. The Lancet, 370, 1253–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Parfit, D. (2011). On what matters (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. (2008). Putting meat on the table: Industrial farm animal production in America. http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Industrial_Agriculture/PCIFAP_FINAL.pdf
  13. Plato. (1997). Protagoras. In J. M. Cooper (Ed.), Complete works. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  14. Pluhar, E. B. (2010). Meat and morality: Alternatives to factory farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23, 455–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Prescott, J. (2012). Taste matters: Why we like the foods we do. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
  16. Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  17. Rohrmann, S., et al. (2013). Meat consumption and mortality – Results from the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition. BMC Medicine, 11, 63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schroeder, M. (2008). Having reasons. Philosophical Studies, 139(1), 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Singer, P. (1990). Animal liberation (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  20. Tefler, E. (1996). Food for thought – Philosophy and food. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Yeomans, M. R., Chambers, L. C., Blumenthal, H., & Blake, A. (2008). The role of expectancy in sensory and hedonic evaluation: The case of smoked salmon ice-cream. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 565–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity College LondonLondonUK