Frugivore / omnivore / carnivore

Anything not covered above probably belongs here!

Moderators: hardcore iv, fredrikw, JP, stateofflux, bronco

Postby veganmonk » Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:44 am

I do link intelligence to a persons choice of diet, yes.

Intelligence results in the choice of a vegan diet.

Also, it is true many people consume meat. It is also true, that diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and obesity are amongst these meat eaters and not in vegans. Also these meat eaters are destroying our planet and causing the unnecessary suffering of our fellow animals. They are thereby demonstrating a lack of intelligence.

I agree with the idea about the word "design" - bad choice, I suppose evolution is much better, and I'd say that human beings have as far as we can tell always been a species evolved around a plant based diet, based on ancient scientific findings and current health research.

Meat based diets were never the majority of the norm in the world until industrial revolution, marketing, corporations, capitalism, globalism, and factory farming became issues. The majority consists of China and India, both which revolved around mainly plant based diets, historically, and even at present, home to the world's largest vegetarian populations.
User avatar
veganmonk
Active Member
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: BC, Canada

Postby VeganPower » Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:58 pm

[quote="VeganPower"][quote="veganmonk"]And I'd also have to say it requires more intelligence and brain power to be compassionate to animals, and also be aware of the damage to our health and planet as a result of killing animals.


You would compare an individual's intelligence to his or her diet? that's a little extreme.

But I do agree with the fact that the meat industry is notorious for environmental health. And yes, factory farmed meat is bad for your health.

That doesn't mean all meat is unhealthy and all sources of meat are linked to environmental destruction.



*notorious for environmental dammage.

i need to spell check my posts
grind the enemy
User avatar
VeganPower
Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada

Postby VeganPower » Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:06 am

[quote="veganmonk"]I do link intelligence to a persons choice of diet, yes.

Intelligence results in the choice of a vegan diet.

Also, it is true many people consume meat. It is also true, that diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and obesity are amongst these meat eaters and not in vegans. Also these meat eaters are destroying our planet and causing the unnecessary suffering of our fellow animals. They are thereby demonstrating a lack of intelligence.

I agree with the idea about the word "design" - bad choice, I suppose evolution is much better, and I'd say that human beings have as far as we can tell always been a species evolved around a plant based diet, based on ancient scientific findings and current health research.

Meat based diets were never the majority of the norm in the world until industrial revolution, marketing, corporations, capitalism, globalism, and factory farming became issues. The majority consists of China and India, both which revolved around mainly plant based diets, historically, and even at present, home to the world's largest vegetarian populations.


I am a vegan for moral reasons like yourself, and I don't feel that intelligence has anything to do with diet.

If people who ate meat were less intelligent than vegans they'd have an excuse to do so. But the fact of the matter is they're not stupid, just ignorant. Being intelligent and ignorant is far worse than being just plain stupid.

That being said. The only problem with eating meat that I have is factory farming and other unnatural forms of meat production. I don't think there's anything morally wrong with eating another animal as long as you do it as nature intended.

My philosophy: If you can find it, kill and prepare it yourself, more power to you.

And wether it's at all necessary to eat meat in north america and other first world regions of the world is another story
grind the enemy
User avatar
VeganPower
Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Top

Postby Wobbly Lifter » Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:54 am

[quote="VeganPower"]
That being said. The only problem with eating meat that I have is factory farming and other unnatural forms of meat production. I don't think there's anything morally wrong with eating another animal as long as you do it as nature intended.


I don't think nature intended anything; nor could I argee that becuase something is natural it is moral. That is the naturalistic fallacy.

[quote="VeganPower"]
My philosophy: If you can find it, kill and prepare it yourself, more power to you.

So might makes right? :shock: Why kill something unless you absolutely have to(like self-defense)? Just becuase we can do something or becuase it's natural doesn't mean it's right;you can justify murder with that argument(which it appears your trying to :? )
Better Living Through Chemistry
User avatar
Wobbly Lifter
Active Member
 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:37 am
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Top

Postby SpugFab » Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:43 am

[quote="VeganPower"]
My philosophy: If you can find it, kill and prepare it yourself, more power to you.

Can't remember where I got this idea from (think it might have been from reading Bertrand Russell), but it seems fair to me.

If you're considering ways to live your life you should imagine what would happen if everyone was to live life that way. If the world would descend into chaos you've probably missed the mark with your ideal.

Can you imagine what would happen if everyone descended upon the countryside to hunt and prepare their food? The option is only open to a privileged few (privileged by location, time or money).
User avatar
SpugFab
Active Member
 
Posts: 4512
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 4:35 pm
Location: Frankfurt am Main
Top

Postby veganmonk » Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:11 pm

[quote="VeganPower"]

I am a vegan for moral reasons like yourself, and I don't feel that intelligence has anything to do with diet.

If people who ate meat were less intelligent than vegans they'd have an excuse to do so. But the fact of the matter is they're not stupid, just ignorant. Being intelligent and ignorant is far worse than being just plain stupid.

That being said. The only problem with eating meat that I have is factory farming and other unnatural forms of meat production. I don't think there's anything morally wrong with eating another animal as long as you do it as nature intended.

My philosophy: If you can find it, kill and prepare it yourself, more power to you.

And wether it's at all necessary to eat meat in north america and other first world regions of the world is another story


Fair enough about the opinion on intelligence - it is just my perspective that it does require intelligence to choose a vegan diet. The elements of intelligence are all demonstrated in this, such as logic and the ability to make the correct decision for the best interests and results of the whole and individual.

About seeing nothing wrong with eating meat, this is because you do not consider the human being a herbivore. If you were to see herds of cows all of a sudden running rampant and trying to eat other animals, would you not see anything wrong with that? It is very "unnatural" (meaning is evolution and not creation based), and also not even physically possible, due to a lack of adequate digestive and predatory abilities. This is the same in human beings. We have not evolved as predators nor have our physical traits evolved to be optimal for flesh eating. So to me, it is very clear that there is something very wrong with the idea of human beings (herbivores), trying to kill and eat other animals.

If anyone disagrees you can meet me at the swingset after school.
User avatar
veganmonk
Active Member
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: BC, Canada
Top

Postby Wobbly Lifter » Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:07 pm

[quote="veganmonk"]
If anyone disagrees you can meet me at the swingset after school.


So if you thought humans were "naturally" omnivores you'd eat meat? :shock: Why does something being natural make it moral? There are all sorts of natural things that most consider immoral. In my view we don't need to eat animals. Eating animals causes pain(among other possible problems). Causing other's pain for personal pleasure is wrong. Not all that complicated.

Still want to meet me by the swingset? Come to Edmonton :twisted:
Better Living Through Chemistry
User avatar
Wobbly Lifter
Active Member
 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:37 am
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Top

Postby veganmonk » Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:23 pm

[quote="Wobbly Lifter"][quote="veganmonk"]
If anyone disagrees you can meet me at the swingset after school.


So if you thought humans were "naturally" omnivores you'd eat meat? :shock: Why does something being natural make it moral? There are all sorts of natural things that most consider immoral. In my view we don't need to eat animals. Eating animals causes pain(among other possible problems). Causing other's pain for personal pleasure is wrong. Not all that complicated.

Still want to meet me by the swingset? Come to Edmonton :twisted:


Yes, I believe in the balance of nature and evolution. There is a reason that there are carnivores, omnivores, and herbivores. It keeps everything in check.

I do not believe humans are omnivores, and therefore I would never eat meat.

And to further my argument about intelligence and choosing a vegan diet....

Image
User avatar
veganmonk
Active Member
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: BC, Canada
Top

Postby VeganPower » Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:09 pm

[quote="Wobbly Lifter"]
So might makes right? :shock: Why kill something unless you absolutely have to(like self-defense)? Just becuase we can do something or becuase it's natural doesn't mean it's right;you can justify murder with that argument(which it appears your trying to :? )


[quote="VeganPower"]And wether it's at all necessary to eat meat in north america and other first world regions of the world is another story
grind the enemy
User avatar
VeganPower
Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Top

Postby VeganPower » Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:13 pm

[quote="spug_myers"][quote="VeganPower"]
My philosophy: If you can find it, kill and prepare it yourself, more power to you.

Can't remember where I got this idea from (think it might have been from reading Bertrand Russell), but it seems fair to me.

If you're considering ways to live your life you should imagine what would happen if everyone was to live life that way. If the world would descend into chaos you've probably missed the mark with your ideal.

Can you imagine what would happen if everyone descended upon the countryside to hunt and prepare their food? The option is only open to a privileged few (privileged by location, time or money).


Oh for sure, If everyone hunted it would be a disaster. Right now humans are such an over-bred plague on this planet that anything they do in mass fucks up the earth.
grind the enemy
User avatar
VeganPower
Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Top

Postby xrodolfox » Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:24 pm

This thread is choke full of Appeal to Nature Fallacies.

It is rather normally benign yet irritating; but it is damn absurd when someone claiming "vegans are smarter than non-vegans" (excuse my paraphrasing) is arguing on the basis of faulty logic.

Compassion, ability to use logic, and quantifiable "intelligence" are obviously no tied together. As many vegan boards show, not all vegans are intelligent, nor good at logic, although a few of them are. ;)
"The worker has the right to leave his boss, but can she do it? And if she does quit him, is it in order to lead a free life; where she will have no master but herself? No, she leaves to sell herself to another employer. She's driven by the same hunger. Thus the worker's liberty is only a theoretical freedom, lacking any means of realization; an utter falsehood."
-Bakunin
User avatar
xrodolfox
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3577
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:29 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Postby VeganPower » Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:31 pm

[quote="xrodolfox"]This thread is choke full of Appeal to Nature Fallacies.

It is rather normally benign yet irritating; but it is damn absurd when someone claiming "vegans are smarter than non-vegans" (excuse my paraphrasing) is arguing on the basis of faulty logic.

Compassion, ability to use logic, and quantifiable "intelligence" are obviously no tied together. As many vegan boards show, not all vegans are intelligent, nor good at logic, although a few of them are. ;)


I was not aware that logic and quantifiable intelligence were "obviously not tied together." I always thought they went hand in hand. If logic is a system of reasoning and intelligence is the faculty of though and reasoning, how is it inappropriate to suggest the two have some sort of link?
grind the enemy
User avatar
VeganPower
Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Top

Postby magnifico » Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:41 pm

veganmonk would you not agree that since humans learned to hunt in groups, cook food etc. we have evolved to make meat a bigger part of our diet.

and the fact that human societies with a history of keeping herd animals have evolved to be lactose tolerant shows that drinking milk is as 'natural' for us as any other dietary adaptation.

you seem to be arguing that at some point our ancestors were herbivores, and that this is the only time in evolutionary history that counts as 'natural' - if we have evolved into omnivores since then then this for some reason doesn't count. What if we went a little further back in evolutionary time? All mammals are evolved from shrew-like creatures which ate insects, eggs and stuff like that. Does this mean that this is our 'natural' diet and is therefore right? What about if we go a bit further back to when our ancestors were fish?

The other major flaw with your argument IMO is that whatever is 'natural' is automatically right. But the animal kingdom is a nasty, brutish place in which there is no room for morals, concepts of social solidarity, altruism etc. - we are the only animal that has trancended this state, and we have done so by evolving brains big enough to make our own decisions and not be driven by pure instinct. I'd say that most positive human behaviour is very 'unnatural' in this sense, and that that is a good thing.

One final thing - back when (if?) our ancestors were herbivores, the disabled would have been a burden on the group and left to die. Would you advocate that we behave this way because it is 'natural'?
User avatar
magnifico
Active Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: Northampton

Postby veganmonk » Wed Aug 16, 2006 11:37 pm

[quote="magnifico"]veganmonk would you not agree that since humans learned to hunt in groups, cook food etc. we have evolved to make meat a bigger part of our diet.

and the fact that human societies with a history of keeping herd animals have evolved to be lactose tolerant shows that drinking milk is as 'natural' for us as any other dietary adaptation.

you seem to be arguing that at some point our ancestors were herbivores, and that this is the only time in evolutionary history that counts as 'natural' - if we have evolved into omnivores since then then this for some reason doesn't count. What if we went a little further back in evolutionary time? All mammals are evolved from shrew-like creatures which ate insects, eggs and stuff like that. Does this mean that this is our 'natural' diet and is therefore right? What about if we go a bit further back to when our ancestors were fish?

The other major flaw with your argument IMO is that whatever is 'natural' is automatically right. But the animal kingdom is a nasty, brutish place in which there is no room for morals, concepts of social solidarity, altruism etc. - we are the only animal that has trancended this state, and we have done so by evolving brains big enough to make our own decisions and not be driven by pure instinct. I'd say that most positive human behaviour is very 'unnatural' in this sense, and that that is a good thing.

One final thing - back when (if?) our ancestors were herbivores, the disabled would have been a burden on the group and left to die. Would you advocate that we behave this way because it is 'natural'?


I am deeming this thread silly. It has gone off topic and is just rhetoric, semantics, and philosophy.

The essence of this matter is very simple:

-man evolved from herbivores (let's not go back to the origin of time, as this is something we simply cannot comprehend. what we do know is that this planet requires and ecological balance of species and their diets. the discussion should be focused on which one humans fall under).

-humans today are healthiest as herbivores

-human being herbivores cause the least amount of destruction to our habitat, the earth

-human being herbivores prevent the needless cruelty of fellow animals on this planet

-human beings that are fully aware of the environmental, health, and animal issues yet fail to go vegan, are indeed, ignorant, and making a less intelligent decision than vegans, for this particular issue. It is not a blanket statement about intelligence in general (ie: vegans are smarter in everyway than non-vegans). I never made such a silly claim!

Trying to make a case for our species to be anything else, is unintelligent :P

If anyone disagrees with this, you can meet me by the bike racks at 3pm after school.
User avatar
veganmonk
Active Member
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: BC, Canada
Top

Postby magnifico » Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:21 am

[quote="veganmonk"]I am deeming this thread silly.


:lol:

[quote="veganmonk"]this planet requires and ecological balance of species and their diets.


I disagree with this. Our planet doesn't require anything, it is a ball of rock upon which there tends to be an ecological balance because different species have evolved to survive best within an environment that includes one another. There is an ecological balance of species and their diets because animals have evolved to fulfil vacant ecological niches - they did this because it made their genes more common in the gene pool, not for the greater good of the planet. Humans evolved to be able to digest milk and cooked meat because it made us more likely to survive at a certain stage in history. Before that (apparently) our ancestors were herbivores, because this best suited their chances of survival/reproduction. The concept of 'Gaia' is pseudo-religious bullshit.

[quote]Trying to make a case for our species to be anything else


I don't think anyone here is arguing that we should be anything but vegan? I just disagree with your reasoning as to why that's all. It should be because we choose to be, not because it is 'natural'.

[quote="veganmonk"]If anyone disagrees with this, you can meet me by the bike racks at 3pm after school.


Image
:wink:
User avatar
magnifico
Active Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: Northampton
Top

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests