Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity
-
0:04 - 0:06So when I say the word "vegan" to you,
-
0:07 - 0:08what do you think of?
-
0:08 - 0:12I'm sure for many of you,
you think of "Oh, vegans. -
0:12 - 0:13Why can't they just live and let live?
-
0:13 - 0:16I personally have no problem
with you being vegan, -
0:16 - 0:18but can you not force your views
-
0:18 - 0:21and just respect my personal choice
to eat animal products?" -
0:21 - 0:23For some of you, you might be thinking,
-
0:23 - 0:26"Ah, no, vegan. I could never be vegan.
-
0:26 - 0:29I love the taste of cheese
far too much for that." -
0:29 - 0:32And some you might
just be confused and thinking, -
0:32 - 0:34"But eating meat is the circle of life,
-
0:34 - 0:37and after all, other animals
eat other animals, -
0:37 - 0:39so why can't I?"
-
0:39 - 0:42This is a selection of the things
that I used to say -
0:42 - 0:45when someone said the word vegan to me.
-
0:45 - 0:47But I also used to say
that vegans were crazy -
0:47 - 0:50and that no one should ever go vegan.
-
0:50 - 0:51But now I am vegan.
-
0:51 - 0:54And so, how on earth did that happen?
-
0:54 - 0:55It's a question I often ask myself,
-
0:55 - 0:58and so to try and understand
why it is that I'm now vegan, -
0:58 - 1:01I want to go through all the main
arguments that I used to make -
1:01 - 1:04and show you why I changed my mind.
-
1:04 - 1:08And so, the first one:
"It's personal choice." -
1:08 - 1:10Can we morally justify not being vegan
-
1:10 - 1:14by saying it's our personal choice
to consume animal products? -
1:14 - 1:16Well, interestingly, yes,
-
1:16 - 1:19it is our personal choice
to consume animal products -
1:19 - 1:22in the same way that it is
our personal choice to abuse a dog -
1:22 - 1:24or beat a cat.
-
1:24 - 1:28In essence, what I'm saying
is that every action that we make -
1:28 - 1:31is a choice that we
personally choose to make. -
1:31 - 1:34And so to imply that it's morally
justifiable to use animals -
1:34 - 1:36because it's a personal choice
-
1:36 - 1:39would mean that every action
that we as humans can make -
1:39 - 1:41must also be morally justifiable
-
1:41 - 1:44because every action is a personal choice.
-
1:44 - 1:47And so, is it morally justifiable
-
1:47 - 1:50to randomly assault a stranger
on the street? -
1:50 - 1:54Is it morally justifiable
to go to a shelter, rescue a dog, -
1:54 - 1:56bring them home
and then abuse them yourself? -
1:57 - 1:59No. Of course it's not.
-
1:59 - 2:01Because those choices have a victim,
-
2:01 - 2:03someone who suffers negatively
-
2:03 - 2:06because of the personal choice
that we have made. -
2:06 - 2:07And so consequently,
-
2:07 - 2:12the inclusion of a victim removes
any possibility for moral justification. -
2:12 - 2:16And besides, one of the reasons
that I went vegan in the first place -
2:16 - 2:18was for personal choice.
-
2:18 - 2:23The personal choice of the trillions of
animals who are killed every single year. -
2:23 - 2:25Who have granted their choice?
-
2:25 - 2:29They would just like to live their life
without human inflicted exploitation. -
2:29 - 2:34Remember, animals don't willfully walk
onto the kill floor of a slaughterhouse. -
2:34 - 2:36They are forced there against their will.
-
2:36 - 2:39Any notion of choice
has been removed for them, -
2:39 - 2:42and so when we cite personal choice
as a justification, -
2:42 - 2:46whose personal choice are we considering,
other than our own? -
2:46 - 2:51And if it is a choice,
then why would we choose to be cruel? -
2:51 - 2:53And so we might then think,
-
2:53 - 2:57"Yes, but the difference is
these animals are bred for that purpose, -
2:57 - 3:00which is why your example
of abusing a dog is disingenuous -
3:00 - 3:02because that's just needless suffering."
-
3:02 - 3:04To which I would say, yes,
-
3:04 - 3:07but most of us find dog fighting
to be morally abhorrent, -
3:07 - 3:12yet many dogs used in fighting
are bred specifically for that purpose. -
3:12 - 3:13Does it make it acceptable?
-
3:13 - 3:15So we might then say after that,
-
3:15 - 3:18"Yes, but dog fighting
is illegal in this country, -
3:18 - 3:20but farms and slaughterhouses
are allowed under law; -
3:20 - 3:23they are lawful practices."
-
3:23 - 3:26But does legality equal morality?
-
3:26 - 3:29Is something acceptable
just because the law says so? -
3:29 - 3:31I mean, if that was true,
-
3:31 - 3:35then dog fighting would be moral
in the countries where it's legal. -
3:35 - 3:39And if we apply that way of thinking,
let's take it to a human situation. -
3:39 - 3:42Is female genital mutilation
a moral and acceptable practice -
3:42 - 3:45in the countries
where it's legally condoned? -
3:45 - 3:47And let's take this argument
and this line of thinking -
3:47 - 3:51and apply it to the "culture
and tradition" excuse as well. -
3:51 - 3:55Is it justifiable to kill dogs
during the Yulin dog meat festival -
3:55 - 3:58because the festival is a cultural event?
-
3:58 - 4:01Is it justifiable to slaughter
dolphins in Japan -
4:01 - 4:06or pilot whales in the Faroe Islands
because those events are traditional? -
4:06 - 4:10And again, using that example
of female genital mutilation, -
4:10 - 4:15is it a moral practice simply
because it is cultural and traditional? -
4:15 - 4:18Because the thing is if we try
to excuse using animals by saying, -
4:18 - 4:22"Well, they form part of our culture
and can be used in our traditions," -
4:22 - 4:23we therefore have to make
-
4:23 - 4:28every cultural and traditional action
and practice morally justifiable -
4:28 - 4:32simply because they are cultural
and traditional practices. -
4:32 - 4:35And so we might get
to the point where we say, -
4:35 - 4:36"Well, that's all fair enough,
-
4:36 - 4:39but the thing is we need to eat
animal products to survive; -
4:39 - 4:41in fact, they are optimal to our diet."
-
4:41 - 4:46And so, the question becomes,
Are animal products a necessity? -
4:46 - 4:48Now, the American Dietetic Association,
-
4:48 - 4:51which is the largest body of
diet and nutrition professionals in the US -
4:51 - 4:55and is formed of over
a 100,000 certified practitioners, -
4:55 - 4:57has categorically stated
-
4:57 - 5:01that a vegan diet is healthy, safe
and nutritionally adequate -
5:01 - 5:07for all stages of life, including
pregnancy, lactation and infancy. -
5:07 - 5:10This is also supported
by the British Dietetic Association -
5:10 - 5:13as well as the NHS.
-
5:13 - 5:17Furthermore, there is extensive
and conclusive research and evidence -
5:17 - 5:20that links our consumption
of animal products -
5:20 - 5:22to some of our leading
diseases and illnesses, -
5:22 - 5:25including heart disease,
certain forms of cancer, -
5:25 - 5:28type 2 diabetes, strokes.
-
5:28 - 5:30The issue of thriving on a vegan diet
-
5:30 - 5:34is not a contentious one
within the scientific community, -
5:34 - 5:39and therefore, consuming animal products
will be deemed an unnecessary action. -
5:40 - 5:42And so let's progress
the argument and say, -
5:42 - 5:45"Yes, but you're denying us of our nature!
-
5:45 - 5:48After all we are omnivores.
Have you seen our canine teeth? -
5:48 - 5:50And we've always eaten meat.
-
5:50 - 5:54If your ancestors didn't eat meat,
you wouldn't even be alive today." -
5:54 - 5:58And so, to being with, many herbivorous
animals do have canine teeth. -
5:58 - 6:01Take the saber-toothed deer as an example,
-
6:01 - 6:06which means that canines
don't necessarily equate to meat eating. -
6:06 - 6:08Furthermore, there's many people out there
-
6:08 - 6:10that believe that biologically
and physiologically speaking, -
6:10 - 6:14our bodies are more closely aligned
to that of herbivorous animals -
6:14 - 6:16rather than omnivorous animals.
-
6:16 - 6:19They point to the fact
that our intestines are on average -
6:19 - 6:23around three times longer
than that of the average omnivore; -
6:23 - 6:26the fact that our jaws,
they grind side to side when we chew, -
6:26 - 6:28like the jaws of herbivorous animals;
-
6:28 - 6:31and the fact that the
hydrochloric acid in our stomach -
6:31 - 6:36is comparatively weaker
to carnivores but also omnivores as well. -
6:36 - 6:39But personally,
I find that entirely irrelevant. -
6:39 - 6:42I don't think it really matters
if we're herbivores or omnivores. -
6:42 - 6:45I mean, just because
we can physically do something -
6:45 - 6:48doesn't mean that we are
morally justified to do so. -
6:48 - 6:52And because we don't have to eat meat,
that means we can survive of plants. -
6:52 - 6:55So biologically speaking,
it makes no difference, -
6:55 - 6:57because we don't have to do it;
-
6:57 - 7:00and therefore,
in the absence of necessity, -
7:00 - 7:03there is the absence
of justification as well. -
7:03 - 7:07And so, I also think
it's a little bit logically dishonest, -
7:07 - 7:08a bit disingenuous,
-
7:08 - 7:10that we claim that we're somehow built
-
7:10 - 7:12to be intrinsically designed
to kill animals, -
7:12 - 7:17yet so many of us would
never want to kill the animal ourself. -
7:17 - 7:20And so, if we wouldn't want
to kill the animal ourself, -
7:20 - 7:24why is it acceptable to pay
for someone else to do it on our behalf? -
7:24 - 7:25I've always found it interesting
-
7:25 - 7:29when I try and show someone
slaughterhouse footage and they say, -
7:29 - 7:32"Don't show me that!
That's going to put me off my food." -
7:32 - 7:33Then I say, Well, why?
-
7:33 - 7:37Why would seeing the process of
how animal products arrive on your plate -
7:37 - 7:38put you off consuming them?
-
7:38 - 7:40That seems to make
little to no sense to me. -
7:40 - 7:42And also, why is it that we get upset
-
7:42 - 7:45when we see footage of animals
being killed in gas chambers -
7:45 - 7:47or animals struggling to survive
-
7:47 - 7:49as they desperately try to flee
-
7:49 - 7:52from the kill floor
they're being forced onto? -
7:52 - 7:55Let's take that idea of ancestors
and run with that for a moment -
7:55 - 7:58because our ancestors
used to do lots of horrible things. -
7:58 - 8:01They would rape. They would murder.
-
8:01 - 8:04Are those actions
automatically justified in society -
8:04 - 8:06simply because our ancestors
used to commit them? -
8:06 - 8:08And besides,
-
8:08 - 8:12why would we ever base our morality
on the actions of a primitive society -
8:12 - 8:15where modern day notions
of right or wrong didn't exist -
8:15 - 8:16and in the absence of choice
-
8:16 - 8:20consuming animals
was a necessity for their survival? -
8:20 - 8:22Let's take that argument.
-
8:22 - 8:23Because it's also pertinent
-
8:23 - 8:27when we look at the "animals
eat other animals" excuse as well. -
8:27 - 8:30Just because a lion kills
and eats a gazelle -
8:30 - 8:33doesn't mean we're justified
to go to a supermarket and buy a steak. -
8:33 - 8:35Lions are obligate carnivores,
-
8:35 - 8:38
which means they need
to eat meat to survive. -
8:38 - 8:41As we've already established: we don't.
-
8:41 - 8:42And like before,
-
8:42 - 8:45
why would we ever base our morality
on the actions of wild animals, -
8:45 - 8:47
who are consistently documented -
8:47 - 8:52as doing things that we would never
deem acceptable within our own country -
8:52 - 8:55or, indeed, within our own
society in general? -
8:55 - 8:57So the argument continued even further.
-
8:57 - 9:00So let's run with the idea
of necessity and survival -
9:00 - 9:04because I'm pretty sure that if a vegan
was stranded on a desert island -
9:05 - 9:07and the only thing
they had to eat was an animal, -
9:07 - 9:09they would definitely do it.
-
9:09 - 9:11And so, the reality is
-
9:11 - 9:14no one knows how they'll react
in an extreme survival situation. -
9:14 - 9:16That's really the point of the argument:
-
9:16 - 9:18to make vegans seem hypocritical
-
9:18 - 9:22
if they say they might eat the animal
if they absolutely had to to survive. -
9:22 - 9:26But there's been documented cases
of humans cannibalising to survive. -
9:26 - 9:27There was a plane crash in the Andes,
-
9:27 - 9:30
and the survivors of the plane crash lived -
9:30 - 9:34because they cannibalised on the flesh
of the dead passengers. -
9:34 - 9:39And so, cannibalism, in effect,
became a justifiable act in that moment. -
9:39 - 9:43Does it mean that cannibalism
is a justifiable act in everyday society? -
9:43 - 9:46Likewise, just because a vegan
might consume an animal -
9:46 - 9:48if they absolutely had to to survive
-
9:48 - 9:50doesn't mean that
consuming animal products -
9:50 - 9:54is a morally justifiable act
in everyday society. -
9:55 - 9:57And so the argument presses further,
-
9:57 - 10:01and we say, "Yes, but consuming animals
is part of the food chain. -
10:01 - 10:02I mean, it's the circle of life:
-
10:02 - 10:04everyone who is born must one day die,
-
10:04 - 10:06that's a natural process,
-
10:06 - 10:10that's symbiotic and harmonious to nature
and the world that we live in. -
10:10 - 10:12And our food chains
are incredibly important. -
10:12 - 10:18They symbolise part of the natural order
and help maintain and form ecosystems. -
10:18 - 10:19Fundamentally they are there
-
10:19 - 10:23to ensure that population sizes
of animals are kept consistent -
10:23 - 10:27and to ensure that the natural ecology
is just well balanced." -
10:27 - 10:31But what we do to animals
when we selectively breed them, -
10:31 - 10:33when we genetically modify them,
-
10:33 - 10:36when we artificially inseminate
and forcibly impregnate them, -
10:36 - 10:38
when we take their babies away from them, -
10:38 - 10:39when we mutilate them,
-
10:39 - 10:43when we exploit them for what they
naturally produce for their own species, -
10:43 - 10:46when we load them into trucks,
take them to a slaughterhouse -
10:46 - 10:49where we hang them upside down,
cut their throat and bleed them to death -
10:49 - 10:52has nothing to do with a natural order,
-
10:52 - 10:53and most importantly,
-
10:53 - 10:59
it fits none of the criteria required
to be labeled as a food chain. -
10:59 - 11:02You see, the food chain that we cite
is a human construct -
11:02 - 11:04created very conveniently
-
11:04 - 11:08to try and justify
what is an entirely unnecessary act. -
11:08 - 11:11It ignores the complexity,
-
11:11 - 11:15an interdependent web of life
that form our natural ecosystems. -
11:15 - 11:18It is an appeal to nature fallacy
that overlooks our ability -
11:18 - 11:23to make moral decisions
as beings who possess moral agency. -
11:23 - 11:24In essence,
-
11:24 - 11:28
the food chain argument draws upon
the idea of "might makes right," -
11:28 - 11:30the belief that
because you have the ability -
11:30 - 11:32to physically exploit someone else,
-
11:32 - 11:36you're somehow
justified to do so as well. -
11:36 - 11:38And the circle of life,
-
11:38 - 11:42all that refers to is two moments
of our existence that are certain: -
11:42 - 11:43our birth and our death.
-
11:43 - 11:46Everyone who's born must one day
come full circle and die. -
11:46 - 11:51But what happens between those areas
of certainty is variable -
11:51 - 11:54and has nothing to do
with preordained circle of life. -
11:54 - 11:56If we run with that argument,
-
11:56 - 11:59we'd be morally excused
to harm anyone at any time -
11:59 - 12:01
in any manner that we so please. -
12:01 - 12:04We'd be morally excused
to murder an animal or, indeed, -
12:04 - 12:07murder a human as well,
running with that logic. -
12:07 - 12:10And so let's move this on
to a more practical note, -
12:10 - 12:15because if the world went vegan, well,
what would we do with all the animals? -
12:15 - 12:18We can't just release billions
of animals into the wild, -
12:18 - 12:20that'd be devastating
for the natural ecology - -
12:20 - 12:22and of course it would.
-
12:22 - 12:24But what we have to understand
-
12:24 - 12:27is that animal agriculture runs
on a system of supply and demand, -
12:27 - 12:29
meaning that when we buy a product, -
12:29 - 12:32we demand that product be supplied.
-
12:32 - 12:35Now, farmers will only breed animals
into existence if they can sell. -
12:35 - 12:38They're not going to breed them
if they can't sell them, -
12:38 - 12:41because that's just not
economically viable in the slightest. -
12:41 - 12:44And so the shift to veganism
would of course be very gradual. -
12:44 - 12:46And so as the number of vegans increases,
-
12:46 - 12:50the number of animals being bred into
existence would decrease proportionally. -
12:50 - 12:53And if - and of course it is an if -
-
12:53 - 12:55but if we ever get that vegan world,
-
12:55 - 12:57that vegan world would be a world
-
12:57 - 13:00
where farmers are simply not breeding
animals into existence anymore. -
13:00 - 13:03And as such, we will never be
faced with the dilemma -
13:03 - 13:06of having to either release
billions of animals into the wild -
13:06 - 13:11or take them to a slaughterhouse
so we simply discard their bodies. -
13:12 - 13:15
"But OK, OK, alright. -
13:15 - 13:18
I see what you're doing,
I see where you're going, -
13:18 - 13:19but this is the problem.
-
13:19 - 13:20You see, vegans are hypocrites.
-
13:20 - 13:24Haven't you heard that small animals
sometimes die in the production of crops, -
13:24 - 13:27and therefore, you can't even
be a 100% vegan?" -
13:27 - 13:28Now, it's true.
-
13:28 - 13:32Animals like caterpillars and worms
do die in the production of crops, -
13:32 - 13:36and we also can't guarantee
that small mammals like mice and rats -
13:36 - 13:38don't sometimes get killed as well.
-
13:38 - 13:42But the difference is that notion
of intention and certainty. -
13:42 - 13:45You see, when we buy an animal product,
we're intentionally paying -
13:45 - 13:49
for someone to cause the suffering
and death of an animal. -
13:49 - 13:50That is a certainty.
-
13:50 - 13:52When we buy a plant product, we're not.
-
13:52 - 13:54And so think about it this way:
-
13:54 - 13:58
if you're driving down the road
and you accidentally run over a dog, -
13:58 - 14:00morally, that is not the same
-
14:00 - 14:04as if you were driving down the road,
saw a dog, actively pursued them -
14:04 - 14:06until you run them over.
-
14:06 - 14:09But the philosophy and ideology
behind the argument -
14:09 - 14:11that it's morally justifiable
to buy animal products -
14:11 - 14:14because sometimes small animals
die in crop production -
14:14 - 14:17adheres to the idea that morally speaking,
-
14:17 - 14:22accidentally hitting the dog is the same
as intentionally hitting the dog. -
14:22 - 14:24"And so what about plants?
-
14:24 - 14:26Because plants are alive as well.
-
14:26 - 14:30So why don't we consider plants
within our circle of moral compassion?" -
14:30 - 14:32And so, plants are of course alive.
-
14:32 - 14:34But they're not conscious.
-
14:34 - 14:37They don't have a brain,
central nervous system or pain receptors, -
14:37 - 14:41but also more importantly,
it can take up to to 16kg of plants -
14:41 - 14:44to produce 1kg of animal flesh,
-
14:44 - 14:46
which means that vastly
more plants are used -
14:46 - 14:49in the production of a non-vegan diet
than a vegan diet. -
14:49 - 14:51So, if we care about plants,
-
14:51 - 14:55logically and morally,
we're still obliged to be vegan. -
14:55 - 14:58And this also ties in nicely
with what we were just saying -
14:58 - 15:00about animals being killed
in crop production. -
15:00 - 15:03Because if more crops are used
in a non-vegan diet, -
15:03 - 15:06that means if we care about small animals
being killed in crop production, -
15:06 - 15:11we're again logically and morally
obliged to still be vegan. -
15:12 - 15:13"But what about soy farming?
-
15:13 - 15:17Because soy farming is devastating
for the environment, is it not?" -
15:17 - 15:20Soy farming is terrible
for the environment. -
15:20 - 15:24But that's only because 70 to 85%
of all the soy that is grown -
15:24 - 15:25is fed to livestock animals.
-
15:25 - 15:31In fact, it's predicted that as little
as 6% could be used for human consumption. -
15:31 - 15:34And that's not even
about vegans eating tofu. -
15:34 - 15:38Because soya is ubiquitous
among nearly everyone's diet. -
15:38 - 15:42It's found in breads and cereals, sauces,
chocolates and so much more as well. -
15:42 - 15:44So then we say,
-
15:44 - 15:48
"But do we have to be vegan?
I mean, vegetarian? I get it. -
15:48 - 15:51
But animals don't die
in the production of dairy and eggs, -
15:51 - 15:54
so surely being vegetarian is enough?" -
15:54 - 15:56Simply put - no, it's not.
-
15:56 - 16:00In the egg industry, male chicks are
useless because they won't produce eggs. -
16:00 - 16:04They also won't grow to be the same size
as the chickens that we kill for meat, -
16:04 - 16:07which means that as soon as they are born,
-
16:07 - 16:10
they're thrown into a giant
macerator, minced up alive, -
16:10 - 16:14
or they're thrown into a gas chamber
and gassed to death. -
16:14 - 16:16All egg laying hens as well
-
16:16 - 16:20
will be sent to a slaughterhouse
after around 72 weeks of life, -
16:20 - 16:23when their bodies are fully depleted
from being overly exploited -
16:23 - 16:26
and they're no longer
profitable to the farmer. -
16:26 - 16:27In the dairy industry,
-
16:27 - 16:30
dairy cows will only produce milk
to feed their children. -
16:30 - 16:32They are mammals, just as we are.
-
16:32 - 16:36And so this means that farmers forcibly
impregnate dairy cows year after year -
16:36 - 16:39to ensure a continuous cycle
and production of milk -
16:39 - 16:42is there for him to sell, or her to sell.
-
16:42 - 16:45When the dairy cow gives birth,
-
16:45 - 16:47the baby will be
taken away from the mother, -
16:47 - 16:50normally within 24 hours of birth.
-
16:50 - 16:54Male dairy calves are useless
to the dairy industry. -
16:54 - 16:58And so this means that approximately
95,000 male dairy calves are killed -
16:58 - 17:02shortly after birth in this country alone,
-
17:02 - 17:04normally by being shot in the head.
-
17:04 - 17:07This is because they won't produce milk.
-
17:07 - 17:10And it's sometimes not profitable enough
to be sold on for beef. -
17:10 - 17:13The female cows will be raised,
and they too will join the herd, -
17:13 - 17:16where they'll be forcibly
impregnated year after year -
17:16 - 17:20and all dairy cows are sent
to the slaughterhouse as well. -
17:21 - 17:26Which means that dairy and eggs
are pretty much the same as meat. -
17:26 - 17:30But potentially even worse
because the animals suffer for longer, -
17:30 - 17:33and yet they still are killed
in the same way. -
17:33 - 17:35And so let's talk about humane slaughter.
-
17:35 - 17:36This is something we often hear
-
17:36 - 17:40when we talk about the killing
of animals in slaughterhouses. -
17:40 - 17:44Now, the word "humane" means having
or showing compassion or benevolence, -
17:44 - 17:47which means that humane slaughter
is of course an oxymoron -
17:47 - 17:52because you can never compassionately
or benevolently take the life of an animal -
17:52 - 17:57who does not wish to die
and who does not have to die. -
17:57 - 18:00And so that brings us on
to our final excuse: -
18:00 - 18:02taste.
-
18:02 - 18:05And so I want to leave you
with a couple of questions. -
18:05 - 18:09What has higher value:
taste or life? -
18:09 - 18:15Do we require more than sensory pleasure
alone to morally justify an action? -
18:15 - 18:19Remember that a meal to us
lasts only a matter of minutes, -
18:19 - 18:23but that meal has cost
an animal their entire life. -
18:23 - 18:27We take their life
for a moment that is fleeting, -
18:27 - 18:32a meal that we forget about
almost as soon as we have consumed it. -
18:33 - 18:35I used to think that vegans
force their views. -
18:35 - 18:37I said this regularly.
-
18:37 - 18:41But one day I realised
that nothing can ever be as forceful -
18:41 - 18:44as taking the life of someone
who does not wish to die, -
18:44 - 18:49taking the life of an animal
who does not wish to die. -
18:49 - 18:52And so in the end,
that's why I became vegan. -
18:52 - 18:56Because when put into perspective,
my arguments held no veracity, -
18:56 - 18:58no credibility, no validity.
-
18:58 - 19:01Fundamentally, I called myself
an animal lover, -
19:01 - 19:05yet I paid for animals to suffer
and die on my behalf. -
19:06 - 19:08Through all of the excuses I used to make,
-
19:08 - 19:11I realised that my values
contradicted my actions, -
19:11 - 19:15and deep down, I could
find no real justification. -
19:16 - 19:17Thank you so much for listening.
-
19:17 - 19:20(Applause)
- Title:
- Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity
- Description:
-
Can you keep eating meat after hearing this? Earthling Ed, a vegan educator, debunks every argument against veganism. Earthling Ed, aka Ed Winters, is a vegan educator, public speaker and content creator based in London, England. Winters is the co-founder and co-director of Surge, an animal rights organisation determined to create a world where compassion towards all non-human animals is the norm. In 2016 Surge founded The Official Animal Rights March which succeeded in a growth from 2,500 participants in London in 2016 to 28,000 participants across the world in 2018. In 2017, Winters produced the documentary Land of Hope and Glory and launched the on-going moving activism project The Big Vegan Activism Van. He has spoken at over 1/3 of UK universities and has given speeches across the world.
In October 2018 Winters opened Unity Diner, a non-profit vegan diner in London where all of the profits go directly back into helping animals. He launched The Disclosure Podcast in February 2019.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx
- Video Language:
- English
- Team:
- closed TED
- Project:
- TEDxTalks
- Duration:
- 19:30
Peter van de Ven approved English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven accepted English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven edited English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven edited English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven edited English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven edited English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven edited English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity | ||
Peter van de Ven edited English subtitles for Every argument against veganism | Ed Winters | TEDxBathUniversity |