The New York Times with another round of the same old horse shit about plant suffering:
Is it morally permissible to submit to total instrumentalization living beings that, though they do not have a central nervous system, are capable of basic learning and communication? Should their swift response to stress leave us coldly indifferent, while animal suffering provokes intense feelings of pity and compassion?
Yeah, our feelings of pity and compassion toward animals are so intense that, in America alone, we raise 9 billion animals in factory farms, and then cut their throats.
Michael Pollan nevertheless cheerleads for this piece on Twitter—doubtless out of a bizarre belief that if he can put vegans on the hook for plant suffering, he can get himself off the hook when it comes to thinking about animal suffering:
Cool piece on how pea plants communicate with one another, possibly raising some tough issues for vegetarians.
It’s galling to see a guy who regularly sidesteps and dismisses the tough issues facing omnivores trying to assert that the rudimentary perceptual and communication capacities of plants may constitute an intractable vegan dilemma—particularly since vegans cause the death of vastly fewer plants than do omnivores once the grain cycled through poultry and livestock is taken into account.
Pollan’s a gifted and entertaining writer who consistently demonstrates he lacks the capacity to think deeply about anything. I’ll start thinking about plants the moment Michael Pollan shows any willingness to think carefully about the ethics of eating animals. Link.