By the most naive rational appraisal, eating n% less meat than usual is fully n% as good—say, for suffering animals—as being a pure vegetarian. However, the social consequences of being a pure vegetarian seem to be entirely different than those of simply eating less meat. (I agree with sam0345 that those social consequences are largely positive.) It’s interesting to think about why.
By the most naive rational appraisal, eating n% less meat than usual is fully n% as good—say, for suffering animals—as being a pure vegetarian. However, the social consequences of being a pure vegetarian seem to be entirely different than those of simply eating less meat. (I agree with sam0345 that those social consequences are largely positive.) It’s interesting to think about why.