A curious case
There are experts in animal ethics, people who study the issue in depth, who still eat animals. Some people conclude from this that "knowing something is wrong doesn't motivate anyone to change." For them, only shocking images, videos, music, or personal experiences change people.
The author thinks this conclusion is hasty and offers other possible explanations.
Maybe they don't think it's wrong
Some animal ethics experts may simply not agree that eating animals is unjust. Studying a topic doesn't mean agreeing with a position.
Maybe they think it's only a little wrong
People think things are more or less wrong. Some experts may give animals some importance, but much less than humans. For them, eating animals would be "a little wrong," which might not be enough to change their behavior.
Maybe they're not being honest
Someone might say they think something is very wrong but, deep down, not really think so.
Other factors
There are also biases, habits, and social pressures that can make someone act against what they believe, at least for a while.
The conclusion
These cases don't prove that arguments don't work. Ethical reflection still plays an important role in changing what people think and do.
In short
- Experts who eat animals might not think it's wrong, or might think it's only a little wrong.
- There may also be dishonesty, biases, and habits.
- This doesn't show that ethical reflection is useless.