The argument
Sometimes "respect for all living things" is used not to defend plants, but to make animals seem less important: "If plants matter too, it makes no difference whether you eat animals or plants."
Even if plants mattered, it wouldn't be the same
Beings who feel can be harmed in especially serious ways that no being without feelings can be:
- they can suffer;
- they can lose good experiences when they die.
Even Paul Taylor, one of the leading defenders of biocentrism, agrees with this.
What if the animal's death were painless?
Even so, it would be worse than a plant's death. The animal's death takes away all the good it would still have lived. The plant doesn't lose any experience, because it never had any.
The logical conclusion
If someone truly believes plants deserve consideration, the conclusion isn't "it makes no difference whether you eat animals." It's the opposite:
- they should avoid eating animals, who eat huge amounts of plants;
- and, to be consistent, they should adopt fruitarianism: eating only what falls off plants, like ripe fruit.
Usually, once people realize this, they stop using the argument.
In short
- Beings who feel can be harmed more seriously than plants.
- Even an animal's painless death is worse than a plant's.
- Anyone who values plants should eat fewer animals, not more.