3 - The Lure of Perfection & All Too Human

Finally, I agree with Kohak...somewhat. In section IV, I feel like his way of relating everything to human reflection is more applicable to society. The vegetarianism issue requires one to reflect on his or her beliefs and why they believe what they do. The three principles he portrays reveal the attitudes of humans. These all make perfect sense because I feel like all three sum up how people view vegetarianism. I would have to say that I fall into the third attitude being that we can certainly strive for the best, however, we need to realize that we will run into "roadblocks" so to speak. Failure is inevitable in life. I think every human learns this at a young age, specifically when we learn to walk. Falling down is bound to happen. Maybe I'm stretching this concept but if we grow up with valid proof that failure is inevitable, why do some people get in a rigid mindset that we are/have to be perfect and we can do no harm in the world? I realize the text is talking about much more profound problems than simply falling down as a baby but nonetheless, it's the same idea.

On page 44, I find it interesting that Kohak says perfection is all or nothing. Also, there is no difference between the person who only eats one egg/day and the person who eats veal with ivory chopsticks. I don't agree with him here because to me, I think there is a huge difference between the two. Kohak later states that "It is about treading lightly, harming as little as possible" (45). I can agree with this statement in that it sums everything up in such a simple way. With all freedom comes responsibility and it is up to us to find the happy median where we can balance our freedom and the act of making right choices which will not harm animals or the environment. When he takes it a step further, however, and says "to live considerately is to spare our kin" is when I have to disagree. I don't consider vegetarianism the only way to be considerate.

In section V, I like how Kohak carries over the idea of with freedom comes responsibility. I also agree with Rollin when he brings up the topic of animal torture only if it can be proven necessary. I understand this could be a difficult subject because where do we as humans draw the line for what is necessary? In addition, I feel that I can relate more to Rollin's points of view in that he states that an imperfect world will still have animal experiments etc. (49). It is up to us to make the difference as to what kind of experiments will be allowed. Just like it says on page 49, we have the ability to determine what kind of a footprint we leave in nature. What will we do with our freedom?