On the 29th my maternal grandmother stopped over at my parent’s house to join us for a meal. She brought over a duck for us to eat. She also brought over insights that amount to nothing less than most important contribution to philosophy so far this century. I, happening to be vegetarian (a person who for the sake of argument, can be described as one who refrains from eating the bodies of animals), refused to eat any of the duck. My grandmother was confused by my reluctance to eat any of the bird. She responded to my reluctance with an argument, which for pedagogical purposes I will reconstruct in premise/conclusion form. I do this not only for the benefit of my fellow vegetarians, but for the benefit of all humanity. The argument is as follows:
P1. If a vegetarian is one who does not eat the bodies of animals, then a duck is a vegetarian.
P2. A duck consumes plant matter.
P3. Myself, a vegetarian, also consumes plant matter.
C1. Therefore, I can eat plant matter as a vegetarian.
C2. Therefore, I can also eat duck as a vegetarian.
Wittgenstein once claimed to have solved all the interesting problems philosophy had to offer. It’s a shame he never met my grandmother.
Blogging the Question 