Fallacies surrounding the defence of hunting seals

False arguments for seal hunting refuted
The hunt is well regulated.
The fact that regulations are upheld and that a deed is not illegal is no defense of the moral caliber of a deed.
The seal population is stable and healthy and is barely affected by the hunt.
The fact that the sort survives does not justify killing individuals.
There is a demand for fur and (seal) blubber on the world markets.
The economy is the driving force behind the hunt and is not a justification for the manner in which trading comes about.
If the local population cannot hunt seals, it will go bankrupt.
This applies to a very limited number of the population. If they concentrated on other business, or even moved to another location, they would not go bankrupt.
In other parts of the world, many animals in factory farming are slaughtered and skinned, unknown to the public.
Although this is true, it is a tit-for-tat argument. The injustice committed by others gives nobody the right to commit injustice himself.
Hunters do all in their power to prevent injuring wild animals.
30-60% of migratory geese die with bullets in their bodies. The most effective way of preventing this, is by not shooting at all.
Seal hunting is a form of fishing and nobody objects to fishing.
Seals are mammals which are hunted illegally. Giving this deed a different label does not make the deed any more acceptable. There are also moral objections thinkable to catching fish.
Canadian seals have been hunted for centuries by Eskimos for their fur.
The Eskimos used this fur for their clothing and they ate the meat. Nowadays animals are cudgeled unconscious in uncountable numbers for commercial reasons and are skinned alive. This causes extra and unnecessary animal suffering.
The hunt does not lead to extinction of the species.
The ethical objection to hunting for economical purposes bears no relation to the continuation of a population.
The local population enjoys an extra income from the hunt.
Nowadays seals are hunted for economical reasons (export of fur and blubber), formerly they were hunted for consumption. The original inhabitants of the polar regions did not form part of the global economy. If they now find that their income is too low, they should move elsewhere and earn their salaries without hunting.

See also: Killing Young Animals for Human Consumption; Be careful not to accidentally buy real fur.
Which fallacy is this? Play the game

Test yourself: which fallacy is this?

Ten statements about animals that you hear all the time. Can you spot the fallacy? After each answer you read why it does not hold.

Play the game →

This article is part of a series on fallacies and demagogy

Some arguments used in debate on the topics in the title simply are invalid. That goes for pro and contra.

We selected a few of the most rigid arguments from different situations and placed an appropriate counterargument.

Because a more clear and honest way of reasoning helps improve the circumstances animals live in. Apart from the specific issues there are the types of arguments in general.

Fallacies are deliberately or accidentally used in a debate.

So be aware of the principles and the integrity of an opponent.

How do you respond to fallacies? Six tips

Give the other person the benefit of the doubt. Start by assuming a misunderstanding, not deliberate deception. Even someone who keeps using fallacies may simply be badly informed or emotionally involved.

  • Mind the context. In a friendly conversation a gentle approach works better than in a formal debate. Adapt to your relationship with the other person and to the aim of the conversation.
  • Stay calm. Fallacies are often meant to stir up emotions. Keep your own emotions in check.
  • Identify the fallacy. Try to understand where the reasoning goes wrong. Do this for yourself, not to catch the other person out.
  • Answer the fallacy. Ask clarifying questions or explain why the argument does not convince you. Avoid technical terms.
  • Stay on topic. Bring the conversation back to what it is about and keep it on a rational level.
  • Be prepared. If you know you will talk to someone who often uses fallacies, gather some facts and arguments beforehand.

See also how to respond to animal-unfriendly behaviour of others.

Non-valid arguments (deceptive arguments) for different groups