If you are offended and experience revulsion at my eating veal, and I am horrified and repulsed by your eating tofu, or by touching it, is that adequate evidence that either eating veal or tofu is immoral?

a. Revulsion or being offended, even merely in terms of etiquette, is the same as morality.

b. Revulsion alone at someone else's action is not sufficient evidence that it is harmful or immoral.

c. Eating veal is immoral, which anyone can tell from looking at a baby cow, and so the mere feeling of revulsion is enough to make a moral judgment.

d. Eating tofu is obviously morally neutral, so I don't have to ask about harm or good.

Question

Byron Davila

Social Studies

14 October, 10:19

If you are offended and experience revulsion at my eating veal, and I am horrified and repulsed by your eating tofu, or by touching it, is that adequate evidence that either eating veal or tofu is immoral?

a. Revulsion or being offended, even merely in terms of etiquette, is the same as morality.

b. Revulsion alone at someone else's action is not sufficient evidence that it is harmful or immoral.

c. Eating veal is immoral, which anyone can tell from looking at a baby cow, and so the mere feeling of revulsion is enough to make a moral judgment.

d. Eating tofu is obviously morally neutral, so I don't have to ask about harm or good.

+3

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Gregory Moran · Answer 1

b. Revulsion alone at someone else's action is not sufficient evidence that it is harmful or immoral.

Explanation:

Hello! A type of food does not become immoral for someone's tastes, even if it disgusts you and you personally choose not to eat it because it's not your type of dish, it is not an opinion that transforms food directly into something prohibited or charged with negative connotation, since it is something subjective that does not influence a culture.