Draft:Moraltarianism

Moraltarianism is a dietary philosophy that advocates for consuming only animal products that an individual is personally willing to kill, emphasizing ethical alignment between one’s actions, conscience, and spiritual well-being. The term, coined in 2025 by S.O.E, derives from the combination of "moral" and "vegetarianism," reflecting a commitment to ethical eating that respects both personal values and the sanctity of life. Moraltarianism posits that food choices should not create psychological or spiritual dissonance, asserting that consuming foods that conflict with one’s conscience can disrupt personal growth and connection to a "higher self." This philosophy encourages individuals to reflect deeply on their relationship with food, particularly animal-derived products, and to select dietary practices that foster harmony on conscious and subconscious levels.

Principles

Moraltarianism is rooted in the belief that ethical eating should be guided by personal responsibility and mindfulness. The core principles include:

Personal Responsibility in Killing: Moraltarians consume only animal products they are prepared to kill themselves, ensuring direct accountability for the act of taking a life. This principle aims to foster a deeper connection to the food consumed and to eliminate the detachment often associated with industrialized food systems.
Conscience-Driven Consumption: The philosophy emphasizes that food choices should align with an individual’s moral and emotional comfort. Consuming foods that cause psychological unease is believed to create a "scar on the conscience," potentially disrupting mental and spiritual well-being.
Spiritual Alignment: Moraltarianism suggests that consuming ethically discordant foods can disconnect individuals from their "higher self," hindering personal and spiritual growth. By choosing foods that resonate positively on both conscious and subconscious levels, moraltarians aim to live in accordance with universal laws of harmony and respect for life.
Individualized Ethical Framework: Unlike rigid dietary systems such as vegetarianism or veganism, moraltarianism allows for personal variation. One individual may feel ethically comfortable killing fish but not mammals, while another may choose to abstain from all animal products, depending on their personal moral boundaries.

Philosophical foundations

Moraltarianism draws inspiration from various ethical, spiritual, and philosophical traditions, while introducing a unique focus on personal accountability in the act of killing. It shares similarities with ethical vegetarianism and veganism, which emphasize reducing harm to animals, but differs in its emphasis on personal readiness to kill as a moral criterion. The philosophy aligns with broader concepts of mindful eating and conscious living, which advocate for intentionality in dietary choices.

Connection to Ethical Vegetarianism and Veganism

Moraltarianism resonates with ethical vegetarianism, which argues that killing animals for food is justifiable only in extreme circumstances, such as survival, and that consuming animals for taste, convenience, or habit is morally problematic. Similarly, veganism, as defined by The Vegan Society, seeks to exclude all forms of animal exploitation and cruelty, promoting animal-free alternatives for ethical, environmental, and health benefits. Moraltarianism diverges by allowing for the consumption of animal products, provided the individual is willing to perform the act of killing, thus prioritizing personal ethical boundaries over universal prescriptions. [[1]] [[2]]

Influence of ancient philosophies

The concept of moraltarianism echoes ancient philosophical arguments for mindful eating. For example, the Greek philosopher Pythagoras (6th century BCE) advocated against eating animals due to their possession of souls, a belief tied to the concept of metempsychosis (transmigration of souls). Moraltarianism adapts this idea by suggesting that the act of killing an animal should be a deeply considered act, reflecting respect for the potential spiritual significance of life. Similarly, Plato’s argument in The Republic that excessive meat consumption leads to societal and environmental imbalance aligns with moraltarianism’s emphasis on sustainable and conscientious food choices[[3]] [[4]]

Spiritual and psychological dimensions

Moraltarianism’s focus on the "higher self" and subconscious alignment draws from spiritual traditions that emphasize harmony between actions and inner peace. For instance, the Jain principle of ahimsa (nonviolence) encourages minimizing harm to all living beings, a concept that resonates with moraltarianism’s call for ethical reflection in food choices. Additionally, the philosophy aligns with Albert Schweitzer’s principle of "reverence for life," which advocates respect for all forms of life as a moral foundation. Psychologically, moraltarianism addresses the cognitive dissonance experienced by individuals who consume meat while feeling discomfort about animal suffering, a concern highlighted by philosophers like Peter Singer, who emphasizes sentience and suffering as key ethical considerations. [of vegetarianism|history] ([[5]])[]([[6]])

Moraltarianism in practice

In practice, moraltarianism requires individuals to confront the realities of animal slaughter and to make deliberate choices about their diet. For example, a moraltarian might choose to consume fish if they are comfortable catching and killing them but avoid beef if they are unwilling to slaughter a cow. This approach contrasts with conventional meat consumption, where consumers are often disconnected from the killing process due to industrialized farming and slaughterhouses.

Steps to adopting moraltarianism

1. Self-Reflection: Individuals assess which animals, if any, they are ethically and emotionally prepared to kill. This may involve considering the animal’s sentience, ecological role, or personal significance.

2. Engagement with Food Sources*: Moraltarians are encouraged to participate in or witness the killing process, such as fishing, hunting, or small-scale farming, to ensure accountability and awareness.

3. Mindful Consumption: Food choices are made to align with personal values, avoiding foods that cause guilt or discomfort. This may lead some moraltarians to adopt vegetarian or vegan diets if they find no animals they are willing to kill.

4. Sustainability and Harmony: Moraltarians consider the environmental impact of their food choices, aligning with principles of environmental vegetarianism, which highlights the ecological consequences of meat production.[7]

Challenges and criticisms

Moraltarianism faces several potential criticisms. Critics may argue that the philosophy’s reliance on personal ethical boundaries lacks universal standards, making it subjective and potentially inconsistent. For example, one person’s willingness to kill chickens but not pigs could be seen as arbitrary compared to the universal abstinence advocated by veganism. Additionally, the practical requirement of killing one’s own food may be infeasible for urban dwellers or those without access to hunting or farming resources. Critics of ethical vegetarianism, who argue that animals lack the moral status of humans, might also challenge moraltarianism’s emphasis on conscience-driven eating, citing cultural or nutritional necessities for meat consumption. [arguments against eating meat]

Proponents of moraltarianism counter that its flexibility allows for greater inclusivity, accommodating diverse cultural and personal contexts while still promoting ethical reflection. By requiring individuals to confront the act of killing, moraltarianism bridges the gap between consumer and food source, fostering a deeper understanding of the ethical implications of eating.

Comparison to other dietary philosophies

Moraltarianism shares common ground with several dietary philosophies but is distinct in its focus on personal accountability for killing. Below is a comparison with related philosophies:

- Ethical Vegetarianism: Focuses on minimizing harm to animals and often abstains from meat entirely due to concerns about animal suffering. Moraltarianism allows meat consumption but requires personal involvement in the killing process. [[8]] - Veganism: Rejects all animal products and exploitation, emphasizing a universal ethical stance against animal use. Moraltarianism is more individualistic, allowing animal consumption based on personal moral readiness.[[9]] - Conscientious Omnivorism: Advocates for ethical meat consumption through humane farming practices. Moraltarianism goes further by requiring the individual to be willing to kill the animal themselves.[[10]] - Environmental Vegetarianism: Focuses on reducing the ecological impact of meat production. Moraltarianism incorporates environmental concerns but prioritizes personal ethical alignment.[[11]]

Cultural and historical context

Moraltarianism emerges in a modern context where industrialized food systems have distanced consumers from the realities of animal slaughter. The philosophy responds to growing awareness of factory farming’s ethical and environmental issues, as highlighted by the World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity (2017), which called for a transition to plant-based diets to combat climate change. By requiring personal involvement in killing, moraltarianism seeks to restore a connection to food sources, reminiscent of traditional hunting and farming practices where individuals directly participated in the food chain.[[12]]

Historically, similar ideas appear in various cultural practices. For example, many indigenous cultures emphasize respect for animals killed for food, often through rituals that honor the animal’s life. Moraltarianism formalizes this respect into a dietary philosophy, encouraging modern consumers to adopt a similar reverence.

Potential impact and future directions

Moraltarianism has the potential to influence dietary trends by encouraging greater awareness of food origins and ethical implications. Its emphasis on personal responsibility could inspire educational initiatives, such as workshops on ethical hunting or sustainable farming, to help individuals align their diets with their values. Additionally, moraltarianism may appeal to those seeking a middle ground between omnivorism and vegetarianism, offering a flexible yet principled approach to eating.

Future research could explore the psychological and spiritual impacts of moraltarianism, particularly how confronting the act of killing affects individuals’ relationship with food and their sense of self. Studies could also investigate the philosophy’s environmental implications, comparing the ecological footprint of moraltarian diets to those of vegetarianism or conventional omnivorism.

References

Singer, P. (1975). Animal Liberation. New York: HarperCollins.
The Vegan Society. (n.d.). Definition of Veganism. Retrieved from [13][](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_vegetarianism)
McMahan, J. (2017). "Might We Benefit Animals by Eating Them?" Lecture delivered at Oxford University.[](https://qz.com/1102616/an-oxford-philosophers-moral-crisis-can-help-us-learn-to-question-our-instincts)
World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity. (2017). BioScience.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_arguments_against_eating_meat)
Schweitzer, A. (1923). The Philosophy of Civilization. London: A. & C. Black.[](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_vegetarianism)
Porphyry. (3rd century CE). On Abstinence from Animal Food. Translated by G. Fay Edwards.[](https://philosophersmag.com/ancient-arguments-for-vegetarianism/)