Richard Dawkins, the (in)famous atheism proselytizer, has mused about eating human meat.
No, he doesn’t want to join the Donner Party. Researchers may soon be able to
manufacture meat from cell lines in the lab, and Dawkins has suggested
in a tweet that we could “overcome our taboo” by eating human flesh so manufactured.
What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism? An interesting test case for consequentialist morality versus “yuck reaction” absolutism.
Yes, we
must break “taboos” or we are not free!
Cannibalism is profoundly immoral in Western culture — absent absolute necessity, such as when members of the Donner Party consumed their already deceased co-travelers to stay alive — because it denies human exceptionalism and the unique dignity and meaning of human life.
This view extends even to those who have died, which is why we treat the deceased in a respectful manner and why desecrating the dead is considered to be immoral and is against the law — even in war.
Dawkins, of course, rejects the concept, considering it “speciesist,” e.g., discrimination against animals. He thinks we are just a collection of carbon molecules and certainly of no intrinsic value simply and merely because we are human. (For example,
he has yearned for the creation of a human/chimp hybrid creature as a means to prove we are not special.)
Facebook
Twitter