Summarize Alastair Norcross’s Fred case and explain what it is supposed to show.

Summarize Alastair Norcross’s Fred case and explain what it is supposed to show.
Note: Norcross’s Fred case is somewhat long, but at this point in the semester you have enough experience to identify which parts of the case are relevant and which can be discarded. (I suspect a satisfactory summary of the Fred case can be done in 1 or 2 moderately sized paragraphs. For example, Norcross goes into some great detail to with regards to Fred’s unique medical condition that a suitably summarized version of the case might be able to condense to a sentence or two.)
Norcross argues Fred’s behavior is comparable to our own. Do you agree or disagree? Explain. Be thorough. Give examples.
Do you think Fred’s behavior is morally acceptable? Do you think the behavior of a normal person who eats meat is acceptable? Why or why not?

Last Completed Projects