Every veg*n has their own reasons for being veg*n and their own opinions about which arguments are most convincing. No argument is going to convince everyone. Changing your beliefs or actions is a complex, individual process.

However, if a list of arguments is presented to a person, I expect that some of those arguments are more likely to work than others. Similarly, if those arguments are presented to 100 people, some will have a greater net effect than others. One might make 10 people consider veg*nism in a more positive light. Another might have that effect on 20 people. Another might have it on 30 people, but completely put off the remaining 70 people, and should thus be avoided. The best argument of all may be one that only influences 2 people but completely convinces them to go veg*n forever.

Which arguments have the highest expected value (backed by evidence) and should be included the most often in conversations and campaigns advocating veg*nism? I'm specifically asking about arguments involving ethics and animal suffering/rights, not health or the environment.

Some hypothetical answers:

1. A psychological study in which different arguments are presented to meat eaters and their reactions are measured and compared.
2. A survey in which veg*ns select from a list the argument that is closest to the argument that initially convinced them to be veg*n.
3. Personal experience from an activist who has had many conversations in an attempt to persuade and has observed the arguments that seem to have the best effect.

Every veg*n has their own reasons for being veg*n and their own opinions about which arguments are most convincing. No argument is going to convince everyone. Changing your beliefs or actions is a complex, individual process.

However, if a list of arguments is presented to a person, I expect that some of those arguments are more likely to work than others. Similarly, if those arguments are presented to 100 people, some will have a greater net effect than others. One might make 10 people consider veg*nism in a more positive light. Another might have that effect on 20 people. Another might have it on 30 people, but completely put off the remaining 70 people, and should thus be avoided. The best argument of all may be one that only influences 2 people but completely convinces them to go veg*n forever.

Which arguments have the highest expected value (backed by evidence) and should be included the most often in conversations and campaigns advocating veg*nism? I'm specifically asking about arguments involving ethics and animal suffering/rights, not health or the environment.

Some hypothetical answers:

1. A psychological study in which different arguments are presented to meat eaters and their reactions are measured and compared.
2. A survey in which veg*ns select from a list the argument that is closest to the argument that initially convinced them to be veg*n.
3. Personal experience from an activist who has had many conversations in an attempt to persuade and has observed the arguments that seem to have the best effect.

Every veg*n has their own reasons for being veg*n and their own opinions about which arguments are most convincing. No argument is going to convince everyone. Changing your beliefs or actions is a complex, individual process.

However, if a list of arguments is presented to a person, I expect that some of those arguments are more likely to work than others. Similarly, if those arguments are presented to 100 people, some will have a greater net effect than others. One might make 10 people consider veg*nism in a more positive light. Another might have that effect on 20 people. Another might have it on 30 people, but completely put off the remaining 70 people, and should thus be avoided. The best argument of all may be one that only influences 2 people but completely convinces them to go veg*n forever.

Which arguments have the highest expected value (backed by evidence) and should be included the most often in conversations and campaigns advocating veg*nism?

Some hypothetical answers:

1. A psychological study in which different arguments are presented to meat eaters and their reactions are measured and compared.
2. A survey in which veg*ns select from a list the argument that is closest to the argument that initially convinced them to be veg*n.
3. Personal experience from an activist who has had many conversations in an attempt to persuade and has observed the arguments that seem to have the best effect.

Every veg*n has their own reasons for being veg*n and their own opinions about which arguments are most convincing. No argument is going to convince everyone. Changing your beliefs or actions is a complex, individual process.

However, if a list of arguments is presented to a person, I expect that some of those arguments are more likely to work than others. Similarly, if those arguments are presented to 100 people, some will have a greater net effect than others. One might make 10 people consider veg*nism in a more positive light. Another might have that effect on 20 people. Another might have it on 30 people, but completely put off the remaining 70 people, and should thus be avoided. The best argument of all may be one that only influences 2 people but completely convinces them to go veg*n forever.

Which arguments have the highest expected value (backed by evidence) and should be included the most often in conversations and campaigns advocating veg*nism? I'm specifically asking about arguments involving ethics and animal suffering/rights, not health or the environment.

Some hypothetical answers:

1. A psychological study in which different arguments are presented to meat eaters and their reactions are measured and compared.
2. A survey in which veg*ns select from a list the argument that is closest to the argument that initially convinced them to be veg*n.
3. Personal experience from an activist who has had many conversations in an attempt to persuade and has observed the arguments that seem to have the best effect.