In his essay, David Foster Wallace asks the reader to consider if eating lobster is ethical. What makes eating lobster ethical is if lobsters feel pain or not, which I believe they do. He describes how lobsters prefer not to be boiled alive. Honoring that preference is called being considerate. Being considerate is one of the aspects of the human condition. These essays we have read in class are about this. Consideration for the animals you consume and consideration for the land you use. Now, it was recommended to think about if my opinions of this text are murky or clear after rereading and discussion. My opinions have neither been made clearer nor made murky. I gather that my opinions have been added to. This time, there is more to think about; more to consider.
Some class discussion made it clear that people’s upbringing determines their predisposition to being considerate or not. People raised in the country are forced to get up close and personal with their food. They are forced to see their food sources as what they are; pigs make pork and pork comes from pigs. Meanwhile, people raised in the city are so far removed from the animal products they are consuming. They get to buy pork from the grocery store, with the reality of it coming from a living, breathing animal being an afterthought.
There is a difference between the feeling that comes from the sight of a pig being slaughtered and the feeling that comes from the sight of a lobster being boiled alive. Perhaps the distinction between these two sentiments is how the suffering creature communicates its suffering. The pig squeals, while the lobster is silent. People have less concern for the lobster, because it doesn’t communicate pain in a similar way to humans. I believe that humans have the duty to be considerate to all things. My reasoning for this is: why not?
