Final answer:
Montaigne's statement establishes a distinction between the barbarity of causing suffering to a living person and the act of eating the dead, and is a contemplation on moral and ethical standards about human life and morality.
Step-by-step explanation:
When Montaigne writes "I think there is more barbarity in eating a man alive than in eating him dead," he is reflecting on moral and ethical standards regarding the value of human life and the treatment of others. The act of eating someone alive can be interpreted metaphorically to signify not just the physical act, but a broader spectrum of causing suffering and exploitation while the person is still capable of experiencing pain and distress. In contrast, eating someone dead, while still barbaric, does not inflict pain on a sentient being. This contemplation aligns with historical revulsions, such as those voiced by Pliny the Elder against human sacrifice and the consumption of human flesh as a way to obtain supposed blessings or health benefits. It echoes modern sentiments on cruelty, where actions causing unnecessary suffering to others are seen as morally repugnant, and the valuation of character and virtue over physical harm, as Socrates believed, with the ultimate harm being corruption of one's soul.