ABSTRACT
Humans have conflictive and contradictory attitudes and behaviours towards nonhuman animals. This chapter reviews some evidence about why it is so difficult to think straight ethically about animals, especially those used for human consumption. It is argued that such a challenge is related to broader psychological phenomena, according to which people tend to react and reason about new upsetting information in ways that aim to justify their previous beliefs. As a result, scientific evidence and well-founded arguments may not be enough to influence others, including their policy decisions. In response, a set of persuasion principles based on cognitive heuristics posed by R. Cialdini are revised and applied to possible lobby efforts on behalf of animals.
