219 Lynn Fendler P H I L O S O P H Y O F E D U C A T I O N 2 0 1 2 PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION 2012 ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ Claudia W. Ruitenberg, editor © 2012 Philosophy of Education Society ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ Urbana, Illinois Encounters with Animals: Production, Consumption, and Education Lynn Fendler Michigan State University Food has tenuous eligibility as a subject in Cartesian-dominated modern philosophy. However, food was a hot topic for pre-modern philosophers, and postmodern attention to the educational philosophy of food has increased greatly in the past decade. Bradley Rowe’s essay provides a rich and nuanced analysis that educates us about the ethics of eating and our encounters with animals. The stated purpose of this essay is “making visible the process of animals- becoming-meat.” I like the creativity of this project, especially its attention to subtleties of argument and its refusal to impose a normative ideology. I also appreciate that the project strives to replace torpid thoughtlessness with awakened sensibilities. Some language in the essay is appropriately provocative, for example “a living, bellowing steer turns into a succulent steak.” The essay is a pleasure to read and an educative contribution to educational philosophy debates. Because I appreciate the ethical project of this essay, I would like to make two general observations about how the argument is constructed. In the process, I will suggest frameworks that would shift the ethical implications of the argument somewhat, but still fully support the project. AVOID THE MIND/BODY SPLIT The essay positions physical consumption as unique, and distinct from mental consumption: “[S]tudents consume messages and advertisements … in schools, but [unlike food] the television program does not literally become part of their physical- ity because students do not literally eat the program.” The problem with positioning food as a unique encounter is that it instantiates a Cartesian mind/body split, which runs counter to the Deweyan approach that frames most of the rest of the essay. In order to sustain the Deweyan approach, it would probably be more effective to regard physical consumption as similar to mental consumption, not as unique. That is, when we see eating as similar to reading or listening, then we can imagine all of these encounters as consumption practices that contribute to who we are. Eating, listening, reading, drinking, perceiving, and imagining are all bases for experiential encounters that serve to educate us. By taking the position that eating is similar to studying, no mind/body split is enacted, and the overall argument of the essay is still supported. SEPARATE THE ETHICS OF PRODUCTION FROM THE ETHICS OF CONSUMPTION As I read it, the essay uses a Marxian commodification framework of critique, which connects the ethics of consumption with the conditions of production: “consumption begins with production, and there is still a bountiful landscape in the indispensable production and labor practices that make consumption possible.” For example, the author says he is “inspired by those humans who … actually kill the