Work Classification Layer
Compare Works
Pick two or more works to set their attribute fingerprints, dimension-by-dimension passages, and shared school embodiments side by side. Especially useful for author-stage comparisons (Wittgenstein early vs late) and for setting a single tradition's foundational texts against each other.
On Abstinence from Animal Food
If animals reason and feel, justice extends to them — a Neoplatonist argument for the meatless life
Attribute Fingerprint
Rows where works disagree are highlighted in gold. The full ontology grid is shown.
| Attribute | On Abstinence from Animal Food |
|---|---|
| Time · Extent | Infinite |
| Time · Ontological Status | Emergent |
| Time · Grain | Continuous |
| Time · Freedom | Deterministic |
| Time · Traversability | Linear |
| Time · Dimensionality | One |
| Time · Direction | Uni-directional |
| Space · Extent | Finite |
| Space · Ontological Status | Emergent |
| Space · Curvature | not engaged |
| Space · Dimensionality | Three |
| Space · Locality | not engaged |
| Matter · Extent | Finite |
| Matter · Ontological Status | Emergent |
| Matter · Conservation | Non-conserved |
| Matter · Dimensionality | Three |
| Matter · Locality | Local |
| Observer · Time Instance | Single |
| Observer · Space Instance | Single |
| Observer · Knowledge Extent | Mediated |
| Observer · Knowledge Retainment | Total |
| Observer · Physicality | Both |
| Observer · Agency | Active |
| Observer · Number | Plural |
| Observer · Metaphysical Agency | Cosmic-ordering |
| Observer · Moral Authority | Reason |
| Observer · Theological Method | Rational |
| Energy · Extent | Infinite |
| Energy · Ontological Status | Emergent |
| Energy · Conservation | Conserved |
| Energy · Dispersibility | Reversible |
| Information · Ontological Status | Substantival |
| Information · Cosmic Conservation | Conserved |
| Information · Personal Conservation | Conserved |
| Information · Granularity | Continuous |
Dimension-by-Dimension Evidence
What each work's passages reveal about its stance on each of the six dimensions.
Time
On Abstinence from Animal Food
The Neoplatonic framework: time is emergent, an image of eternity. The historical argument in Book II (from original bloodless sacrifice to corrupt blood sacrifice) implies a linear degeneration narrative. "In the beginning, piety was pure and bloodless." (De Abstinentia II.5, paraphrase)
Space
On Abstinence from Animal Food
Not discussed philosophically. The ethnographic material in Book IV (Indian Brahmans, Egyptian priests, Jewish Essenes) gives the treatise a global geographical scope.
Matter
On Abstinence from Animal Food
The body is matter ensouled — a Neoplatonic composite. Animals possess material bodies animated by rational souls. The material world is the arena of moral action. "Every ensouled creature participates in reason to some degree." (De Abstinentia III.8, paraphrase)
Observer
On Abstinence from Animal Food
The observer is a soul temporarily embodied, seeking purification. Animals are also observers — they perceive, reason, and suffer. Knowledge is mediated through sensation and intellect. The cosmic order (Neoplatonic emanation) governs the hierarchy of souls. "If animals can reason, they are kin to us." (De Abstinentia III.1, paraphrase)
Energy
On Abstinence from Animal Food
The emanative power of the One sustains all levels of being. The argument for abstinence is partly energetic: eating meat binds the soul more tightly to the body and its passions. "Heavy food weighs down the soul." (De Abstinentia I.45, paraphrase)
Information
On Abstinence from Animal Food
The Forms in Intellect are the archetypal information. Animal rationality — the central claim of Book III — means that animals participate in the informational order of the cosmos. "The logos in animals is imperfect but not absent." (De Abstinentia III.8, paraphrase)
Internal Tensions
Where each work's argument pulls against itself.
The chief tension is between the Neoplatonic depreciation of embodied life (the body is a prison, matter is almost non-being) and the passionate defence of animal welfare that follows from extending reason and justice to animals. If the material world is a fall, why care so much about the suffering of its inhabitants? Porphyry's answer — that compassion purifies the soul — is persuasive but sits awkwardly with the metaphysical framework. A second tension: the argument applies only to "the philosopher" (De Abstinentia I.27), not to everyone — an elitism that limits its practical scope.