Abstract
In developed countries at the beginning of the 21st century, a second nutritional transition seems to have emerged with a tendency towards plant-based diets and a decrease in meat consumption. This transition suggests that logical arguments tend to influence individuals more and more towards vegetarian diets. This paper proposes a methodology for modeling a network of arguments around vegetarian diets using an abstract argumentation approach. Each argument, formalized by a node, is connected to the other arguments by arrows formalizing the attacks between them. Through this methodology, we have been able to formalize a network of arguments about vegetarian diets and identify the health arguments on which an emphasis must be made in comparison with those touching ethics or other types of arguments. This methodology also identified the key arguments because of their strong centrality by being attacked and attacking other arguments. These initial results from this network of arguments suggest that the controversies surrounding vegetarian diets could be polarized around these central arguments of health. Although ethical arguments appear to be of little importance in our network, the key question of the necessity of animal products for human health is probably decisive in the ethical choices towards vegetarian diets.