Let's break down the passage step by step to understand the role of the boldfaced part.
The argument starts with vegetarians providing two reasons for not eating meat:
1) Health considerations
2) Aversion to living at the expense of other conscious creatures.
The boldfaced part introduces a hypothetical scenario: "suppose that eating meat were essential to good health for humans." Based on this hypothetical, the argument suggests that the second reason (aversion to living at the expense of other creatures) might not be strong enough on its own to justify not eating meat.
Now, let's evaluate the answer choices based on the role of the boldfaced part:
Quote:
A. It is used to disprove the vegetarian position that we should not eat meat.
The boldfaced part doesn't disprove the vegetarian position; it just introduces a hypothetical scenario.
Quote:
B. It is used to show that the two types of reasons cited in favor of vegetarianism are independent.
The argument doesn't delve into whether the reasons are independent or not.
Quote:
C. It is used to disprove the claim that a vegetarian diet is healthy.
The boldfaced part doesn't disprove the health benefits of vegetarianism; it just offers a hypothetical counter-scenario.
Quote:
D. It is used to weaken the claim that the consciousness of animals is a sufficient reason for not eating meat.
This seems to align with the argument. If meat were essential for human health, then the moral reason about animal consciousness might not be a strong enough reason on its own.
Quote:
E. It is used to show that there is no sufficient reason for not eating meat.
The argument doesn't claim there's no reason; it just questions the sufficiency of one of the reasons in light of the hypothetical.
The role of the boldfaced part is to present a hypothetical that might challenge the sufficiency of one of the vegetarian arguments. Thus, the correct answer is:
D. It is used to weaken the claim that the consciousness of animals is a sufficient reason for not eating meat.