I understand your point, but I feel like I should point out that consensual cannibalism does have a victim, the cannibal.
Humans eating human meat (and likewise, cows eating cow-meat, pigs eating pig-meat) can cause some very very weird and very serious and very rare illnesses. (social?) Animals have not evolved to eat their kind, or perhaps put differently; animals have evolved _not_ to eat their kind.
Sure. But let's say it's fully sterilized and fully cooked so you have 100% guarantee of not getting sick from it. Is it still wrong?
It's similar to the objection you hear about incest: "Yeah but what if the woman gets pregnant", thus you set the conditions that there is 100% no chance of conception.
And actually, our closest relatives, the chimps, have evolved wonderfully to eat their own kind. In fact they find each other delicious during constant raids on the enemy's territory.
> let's say it's fully sterilized and fully cooked so you have 100% guarantee of not getting sick from it.
I'm being a pedant here, and this isn't really relevant to the previous commenters point, but worth noting that one of the known dangers of cannibalism (CJD) is less related to typical sterilisation and not quite as well understood in general, so 100% guarantees are hard to come by.
Yep. It's more of a philosophical experiment than something that is backed by perfect hard science. The point remains that most people (at least outside of the tribes that practice it) would find it completely wrong even when given hypothetical perfect guarantees.
I get that it was not your point, but the problem with cannibalism is the transmission of prion proteins. Not really an infectious disease per se. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease)
Humans eating human meat (and likewise, cows eating cow-meat, pigs eating pig-meat) can cause some very very weird and very serious and very rare illnesses. (social?) Animals have not evolved to eat their kind, or perhaps put differently; animals have evolved _not_ to eat their kind.