Posthumanism and Cultivated Meat: Ethical Links
- David Bell
- Jan 10
- 10 min read
Posthumanism and cultivated meat are reshaping how we think about animals and food. Posthumanism argues for recognising animals as beings with value beyond their use to humans. Cultivated meat, made from animal cells in labs, offers a way to produce meat without breeding or killing animals. Together, they challenge traditional farming and aim to reduce animal suffering.
Key points:
Posthumanism: Questions human dominance over animals and promotes reducing harm.
Cultivated Meat: Grown in labs, it eliminates the need for slaughter and addresses ethical, environmental, and health concerns.
UK Developments: In 2025, the UK approved cultivated meat for pet food and launched a safety programme for human consumption.
Despite progress, challenges remain, including public scepticism, regulatory hurdles, and ethical debates about using animal cells. These approaches aim to transform farming and reduce harm, offering a new way to think about food and animals.
1. Posthumanism
Posthumanism challenges the traditional idea that humans are at the centre of ethical considerations. Instead, it advocates for shifting the focus away from humans, recognising that animals have intrinsic value beyond their utility to us. This philosophical approach aligns closely with the concept of cultivated meat, questioning why human sustenance should depend on the suffering and death of animals [2][1].
Ethical Stance on Reducing Harm
At its heart, posthumanist ethics takes a practical approach to minimising harm. Rather than demanding an immediate and total rejection of animal products - often referred to in philosophy as "ideal theory" - it supports a more gradual and realistic path. Cultivated meat fits this framework, offering a tangible way to significantly reduce animal suffering in the short term [2].
Posthumanism doesn’t just focus on physical pain; it also addresses the systemic exploitation of animals, treating them as mere tools for food production. By challenging this practice, it seeks to reduce suffering on a broader scale [5][3]. The environmental benefits are also striking: moving away from conventional livestock farming could free up nearly 76% of agricultural land, allowing ecosystems to recover and wildlife to thrive [5].
This pragmatic approach also reshapes how we perceive animals and their agency.
Human–Animal Relationships
Posthumanism encourages what scholars describe as an "anthropological shift" - moving from seeing animals as commodities to recognising them as beings with their own interests. This shift is further reinforced by the idea of cell cultivation replacing the domestication of animals. As Andre Forgacs, founder of Modern Meadow, put it:
Future generations will look back on our era of (industrial) animal husbandry and slaughter as a form of barbarism [2].
This perspective could lead to what some term "agricultural animal obsolescence", where raising and killing animals for food becomes unnecessary [1][6]. By 2040, it’s projected that traditional meat may account for only 40% of global production, with cell-based meat making up 35% and plant-based alternatives 25% [1]. Such a transformation would redefine humanity’s relationship with animals, allowing them to exist for their own sake rather than as resources.
The Role of Technology
Technology plays a pivotal role in realising this ethical vision. By decoupling meat production from animal slaughter, cellular agriculture disrupts the long-standing belief that meat must come from a killed animal [3]. This shift marks the beginning of a "postdomestic" era, where meat production no longer comes at the expense of sentient beings.
However, this technological shift raises important questions. Critics worry that reliance on advanced food systems could lead to dependence on corporate-controlled biotechnology, undermining local, self-sufficient food ecosystems. This tension between technological innovation and "food sovereignty" remains a key concern within posthumanist discussions [5].
Cultural and Societal Impacts
The ethical and technological changes brought by cultivated meat also have deep cultural implications. Historically, meat production has often been associated with masculine dominance. In contrast, lab-grown meat - produced through tissue cultivation - carries a more gender-neutral symbolism, potentially reshaping societal attitudes towards food and power dynamics [3].
Additionally, as technology makes animal slaughter unnecessary, there is a growing push for stricter animal protection laws and recognising animals as individuals with rights rather than property [1]. This legal shift reflects posthumanism’s broader aim: building a society where animals are valued for their inherent dignity, not just their usefulness to humans.
2. Cultivated Meat
Cultivated meat is reshaping how we think about food production by using cellular agriculture to create real meat without breeding or slaughtering animals. This innovative approach not only reduces harm to animals but also challenges long-held perceptions about human–animal relationships, leverages cutting-edge technology, and sparks cultural debates about the future of food.
Ethical Stance on Harm Reduction
The primary goal of cultivated meat is to eliminate the need for animal slaughter. Marina Sucha Heidemann from the Animal Welfare Laboratory highlights this ethical shift:
the acceptance of the slaughtering of animals for food sets any debate about what is acceptable to do to animals at an extremely low bar [1].
By growing muscle tissue from cell samples rather than raising and killing animals, this process drastically reduces the suffering caused by practices like intensive confinement, painful procedures (e.g., beak trimming and castration), and the stress of transport and slaughter. Beyond improving animal welfare, cultivated meat also addresses public health risks by cutting out zoonotic diseases like H5N1 and SARS-CoV-2 and reducing the use of antibiotics that are prevalent in densely packed livestock systems [1]. However, some ethical concerns remain. For instance, cell harvesting through muscle biopsies is still invasive, and early methods relied on foetal bovine serum. Encouragingly, the industry is making strides toward animal-free growth media [2]. These developments are prompting a broader reassessment of animals’ roles in food systems.
Human–Animal Relationships
Cultivated meat is redefining how humans interact with animals, moving away from raising animals for consumption to cultivating cells. This shift transforms animals from being seen as commodities to being recognised as biological contributors. This reimagining has both legal and social implications. Political theorist Robert Garner notes:
Cultivated meat represents a practice within a non-ideal theory, as it offers a strategy for transforming agriculture in an ideal direction [2].
Some ethical perspectives even propose viewing donor animals as workers with rights, ensuring that biopsies are done humanely. Regulatory decisions reflect this evolving viewpoint: Singapore approved cultivated meat in December 2020, while Italy banned it in December 2023. Similarly, U.S. states like Florida and Alabama introduced bans by April 2024 [2].
Role of Technology
Technology plays a crucial role in this transformation, challenging traditional ideas about meat production. Instead of farms, bioreactors now take centre stage, growing cells in nutrient-rich media rather than relying on raising and slaughtering animals [3]. This shift marks the arrival of a "postdomestic" era, where food production is less tied to traditional farming. However, this high-tech approach raises concerns about food sovereignty. Critics argue that centralised production controlled by large biotech companies could threaten local farming communities and concentrate power over food systems [5].
Cultural and Societal Implications
Cultivated meat also carries cultural weight. Historically, meat production has been associated with masculine ideals of control and dominance over animals. In contrast, lab-grown meat - produced through cell cultivation - presents a more neutral image that could reshape societal views on food and power [3]. In the United Kingdom, media coverage from 2017 to 2023 has framed cultivated meat in three main ways: as a technological fix for post-Brexit challenges, as a tool to improve food security and reduce environmental impact, and as a source of tension with traditional farming and public health concerns [7]. Many UK farmers view it as a threat to their livelihoods. Alongside these debates, there’s growing interest in legal frameworks that recognise animals as beings with intrinsic rights rather than property, aligning with posthumanist ideals.
This new approach to meat production reflects the vision promoted by organisations like The Cultivarian Society (https://cultivarian.food), which advocates for a future where meat is produced without animal suffering.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Posthumanism and cultivated meat both aim to reduce harm in human–animal relationships, but they approach this goal in very different ways. By examining their strengths and weaknesses, we can see how these approaches might complement each other - or where they diverge. This comparison helps highlight their potential and the challenges they face.
Posthumanism provides an ethical framework that questions the idea of human superiority over other species. It aims to dismantle anthropocentric beliefs, calling for a more inclusive view of animals as beings with intrinsic value. However, turning these principles into action isn't straightforward. Deeply ingrained cultural attitudes towards meat consumption present a significant hurdle, requiring a fundamental shift in how society views its relationship with animals. There's also the risk of eco-authoritarianism, where prioritising efficiency could marginalise rural communities that rely on traditional farming practices, potentially undermining democratic participation [5].
Cultivated meat, on the other hand, offers a concrete, technological solution to animal slaughter. Projections suggest that by 2040, cell-based meat could make up 35% of the global meat market, potentially freeing up 76% of agricultural land for habitat restoration [1]. The cost of producing lab-grown burgers has also plummeted - from £250,000 in 2013 to an estimated £7.20 by 2025 [8]. Despite these advancements, challenges persist. Scaling up production, eliminating animal-derived components like foetal bovine serum, and navigating regulatory hurdles remain significant obstacles. For instance, Italy banned cultivated meat in December 2023, and similar restrictions have emerged in parts of the United States [2]. Critics also argue that cultivated meat could inadvertently reinforce traditional forms of animal exploitation, albeit with a technological twist [2].
The table below highlights the key advantages and challenges of each approach:
Feature | Posthumanism | Cultivated Meat |
Primary Objective | Challenge human–animal hierarchies and anthropocentrism | Reduce animal suffering and eliminate slaughter |
Ethical Advantage | Recognises animals as beings with intrinsic value | Prevents large-scale animal slaughter |
Practical Challenge | Overcoming deeply rooted cultural norms around meat consumption | Scaling production, removing animal-derived inputs, and gaining regulatory approval |
Social Effect | Promotes a cultural shift in human–nature relationships | Disrupts the meat industry but risks corporate monopolisation |
The Cultivarian Society (https://cultivarian.food) envisions a future where these ethical and technological approaches merge, fostering a compassionate and scientifically informed rethinking of human–animal interactions.
Conclusion
Posthumanism and cultivated meat share a common goal: reducing harm in the relationship between humans and animals. Both challenge the long-standing belief that animals exist solely for human benefit, aiming to dismantle the hierarchies that have justified animal slaughter for centuries. Traditional animal agriculture has normalised practices that these approaches seek to fundamentally transform, and cultivated meat is a tangible step towards realising this ethical vision.
Posthumanism questions the human-centred worldview by recognising the inherent value of animals, while cultivated meat presents a practical way to significantly reduce animal slaughter. From a utilitarian perspective, this represents meaningful progress. However, a rights-based approach raises ethical complexities, as cultivated meat still depends on animal cells.
This ethical and technological interplay is shaping policy discussions in the UK. In 2025, the UK became the first European country to approve cultivated meat for pet food, and the Food Standards Agency has introduced a regulatory sandbox to streamline approvals for human consumption [4]. With the UK pursuing its net-zero targets and seeking to lower methane emissions from livestock, cultivated meat offers a practical solution - allowing meat consumption to continue while addressing urgent climate and animal welfare concerns. Policymakers will need to ensure high welfare standards for donor animals and implement transparent labelling to clearly differentiate cell-cultivated products from traditional meat.
Integrating these ethical and technological approaches is essential for reshaping food policy in the UK. The Cultivarian Society (https://cultivarian.food) envisions a future where real meat is produced without slaughter, grounded in compassion, science, and informed choice. By combining posthumanist ethics with technological advancements, the UK has the opportunity to lead a global shift toward a food system that respects both human needs and animal lives. This reimagined system moves the focus from whether meat should be consumed to how it can be produced responsibly, ensuring dignity for animals and sustainability for the planet.
FAQs
What role does posthumanism play in the development of cultivated meat?
Posthumanism rethinks the way we view human-animal relationships, urging us to broaden our ethical boundaries to include all species. This perspective aligns seamlessly with the concept of cultivated meat, as it promotes separating meat production from the need for animal slaughter. The aim? To minimise harm and revolutionise how we approach food sourcing.
By redefining meat as a product that doesn't rely on living animals, posthumanist principles pave the way for groundbreaking advancements in food science and technology. Movements like The Cultivarian Society champion these ideas, advocating for ethical and sustainable alternatives to the problems created by industrial farming. Together, these efforts are shaping a gentler, more sustainable approach to feeding the world.
What ethical issues are associated with using animal cells in cultivated meat production?
The ethical debates surrounding cultivated meat often focus on its reliance on animal cells and the methods used to produce it. One key issue is the initial collection of cells from animals, which some argue could cause distress or harm to individual animals or even impact their species as a whole. Another common concern is the use of animal-derived growth media, which, unless replaced by fully synthetic options, might continue to exploit animals.
Beyond these practical concerns, there's a deeper philosophical question: does cultivated meat inadvertently maintain a link to traditional animal farming? This connection could slow progress towards creating food systems that are both more compassionate and environmentally friendly. These ethical considerations underscore the importance of continuous innovation and reflection as cultivated meat technology develops further.
What impact could cultivated meat have on traditional farming and local food systems?
Cultivated meat has the potential to reshape farming as we know it, shifting protein production from traditional livestock to bioreactors, which are often operated by large biotech companies. While this change might reduce the reliance on farmed animals, it could also centralise production, sidelining small-scale farmers and disrupting local supply chains. This raises important questions about food sovereignty and the economic well-being of rural communities.
On the other hand, there’s room for optimism, especially for UK farmers looking to adapt and diversify. Cultivated meat could open up opportunities for farmers to contribute in innovative ways. For instance, they might supply cell cultures, make use of by-products like amino-acid-rich waste, or even host small-scale bioreactors on their farms, generating new revenue streams. While these smaller operations might carry higher costs compared to large industrial facilities, they could help minimise environmental impacts and keep financial benefits closer to home.
The Cultivarian Society envisions a future where cultivated meat works alongside traditional farming, providing a more humane and sustainable protein option while empowering farmers and strengthening local food networks.
Comments