From The Case for a Vegan World

Contents 1 The Case for a Vegan World is a complete and structured argument for Veganism 1.1 The Debate we are engaged in 1.2 The Problem with Argument 1.3 The Answer 1.4 Summary of the Argument 1.5 Uses 1.6 Vision

[edit] The Case for a Vegan World is a complete and structured argument for Veganism

[edit] The Debate we are engaged in

Those of us who are vegan and interested in outreach to others, are engaged in a debate. It is a debate with every member of society who is not yet vegan. It is a debate about the benefits to them and to society of a vegan diet and lifestyle. It is a debate that needs to reach out to them, wherever they are, whatever their beliefs, and whatever their current dietary and lifestyle choices.

In engaging in this debate, we produce a lot of arguments in favour of veganism, and the rest of society produces a lot of arguments against. The debate rages back and forth, and some people are convinced and become vegan, and many are not.

We need to be as clear as possible about the reasons why veganism is a good option for individuals and society, and we need to put these clear arguments in as many heads as possible.

[edit] The Problem with Argument

Recently, academics have highlighted how badly people typically perform in ordinary reasoning and argument tasks (van Gelder, T. 2003. Enhancing deliberation through computer supported argument visualization).

Not only are people unable to follow arguments, but very often they remember the argument as being smaller and simpler than what the author of an argument had intended. There is very often a lack of clarity in the prose form of an argument, which causes confusion for the reader, and prevents them from gaining an understanding of the strength of the argument (or otherwise).

Van Gelder highlights that by using a graphical representation of an argument, both the author and the reader are able to better comprehend the argument, its main points, strengths and weaknesses.

By constructing an argument graphically, use can be made of a greater range of our cognitive resources, resulting in easier to create, alter and understand arguments.

[edit] The Answer

Therefore, we need to produce a structured argument for veganism, that can be shown graphically.

It should have a simple and easily remembered structure. The arguments should be complete, and non-overlapping, and normalised to enhance simplicity. At each level, there should be sufficient exposition and evidence to leave the reader in no doubt that the argument is sound and complete.

The argument should include all of the objections that are likely to be raised, even the silly ones, along with complete rebuttals where possible.

The argument should be extensible and flexible enough to include new arguments as they may occasionally arise, and easily find a place for them in the overall scheme.

It should include both evidence (articles, statistics, scientific papers, reports) and examples (photos, video, articles, anecdotes), linked to their place in the argument.

The point about the structure of the argument is that is not the eventual form that may be presented in order to convince an audience. For that purpose, it must be transformed into an easily digestible form.

[edit] Summary of the Argument

A sample high level of the argument presented on the wiki, when converted to common English prose, reads like this:

Veganism is good for individuals and society because: - Veganism is good for the environment; - Veganism benefits human health; - Veganism reduces the suffering of non-human animals; - Veganism benefits human culture; - As a result of all the above, veganism benefits the economy; - And for those who are religious and depending on their particular belief system, veganism may also be a religious imperative.

Veganism is good for the environment because: - Animal industries require extensive land use, and damage the land; - Animal industries use and pollute enormous amounts of fresh water; - Animal Product Extraction damages the marine environment; - Animal Industries are damaging and changing the atmosphere of the planet; - Animal industries use enormous amounts of energy and scarce materials; - Animal industries destroy biodiversity and threaten species; and - Animal Industries cause poverty and starvation of people.

Veganism benefits human health because: - In every major body system, there are negative effects and diseases associated with animal products, which can be avoided or reduced using a vegan diet; and - In overall health terms, vegans are leaner, healthier, happier and live longer.

And so on…..

[edit] Uses

After we have constructed such an argument for veganism, it may be immediately usable in its 'graphical' form.

Nevertheless, in order to be attractive and usable by different audiences, it may need to be transformed into other media and formats.

Some of the immediately available uses that have appealed to us include:

a. Presentation Summary. Conversion into a business presentation format (such as PowerPoint or similar), including suitable pictures and video, in order that vegan organisations or activists may present the argument to audiences in person.

b. Prose. Conversion to prose, for use in traditional publications, such as newspapers, magazines and books. Many newspapers will not accept 'opinion pieces' in spreadsheet format! However, use of the argument map to structure a coherent prose argument is possible. The clarity of the argument should also help readers to follow the argument. Suitable occasions (such as World Vegan Day) should be found to argue for the inclusion of appropriate articles in newspapers.

c. Graphics. Conversion into graphics, so that the argument can be seen set out graphically, either using cartoons or more traditional art styles. For example, the argument pertaining to the Environment includes Land, Fresh Water, Ocean, Atmosphere, Energy & Materials, Animals and People. This argument can be imagined as a picture containing these elements, with the relevant advantages of veganism shown within the graphic.

d. Memory Aid Cards. By summarising the high-level argument, it may be reprinted on a small card, which can be carried by vegans interested in responding to approaches about the logic of their lifestyle. Because the high level summary provides a 'framework' for remembering the arguments, it will often be possible to also remember a great deal of the detailed supporting argument, using the high level points as cues for the memory.

e. Poster / Postcard format. Preferably using graphics, the high level argument can be distributed widely using printed material, hopefully allowing a wider number of people to see and understand the argument.

f. Manifesto. By conversion into a prose format designed to initiate change, the argument can be used as input to policy considerations for political parties. We have already been able to include much of the argument in our local Green Party policy deliberations.

g. Research. The map can be used to highlight areas where further research is necessary, where the argument is weaker, or where key objections need to be addressed.

h. Use of Parts. Sub-sections of the map can be highlighted and used for specific audiences. For example, the Health section for Medical Focussed Audiences, the Environment section for Conservation Minded Audiences, the Animal Suffering section for those audiences interested in the wellbeing of animals.

It is hoped that the argument map can become a commonly agreed format amongst vegan interest groups, unifying our arguments, and allowing more in-depth collaboration without repetition of work.

The work is NOT copyright, and is intended for distribution to support vegan organisations and arguments.

[edit] Vision

We hope to further develop the 'argument map' that shows veganism is good for individuals and society, as an ongoing project. We hope to appoint 'section editors' at several levels, so that the extensive examples, and evidence gathered for each argument can be collated and included with some rigour. We also hope to receive contributions from around the world, and to include any and all existing arguments into the map.

The argument map can be published and publicly available to all interested parties, so that they may use it for their own 'uses' and ends.

We have already become much better at understanding and explaining the vegan position, through the practice of putting together this outline argument. We hope that others will also find it useful for organising their arguments.

Ultimately, of course, we hope for a vegan world.

Bruce Poon

Peter Carr