The plant objection
One of the things vegans hear most: "What about plants?" The idea is that if eating animals is wrong, eating plants would be wrong too, so it makes no difference. The author looks at two versions.
Version 1: "plants are alive too"
First, a practical answer: most of the crops grown in the world are used to feed the animals raised for consumption. So people who eat animals are responsible for the deaths of many more plants than vegans are.
But the main answer is something else. Death is a harm because it takes away the good experiences someone would still have had. A plant has no experiences: it doesn't feel anything. So death doesn't take anything away from it, from its own point of view.
Version 2: "plants feel too"
The smaller problem: people who say this usually base it on the fact that plants react to their environment. But reacting isn't feeling. A thermostat reacts to heat too. Plants don't have a nervous system, let alone a brain, which is what makes consciousness possible.
Sometimes studies about plants use words like "memory" or "communication." That's a way of speaking, not proof that they feel.
The bigger problem: even if plants did feel, the conclusion would be the opposite of what the objection wants. Since animals eat lots of plants, eating animals would kill even more "sentient beings." The most consistent thing would be to become a fruitarian: eating only what falls off plants, like ripe fruit.
Once people realize this, they usually stop using the objection.
In short
- Eating animals kills more plants than being vegan.
- Plants have no brain or nervous system, so they don't feel.
- If they did feel, that would be one more reason not to eat animals.