|
xFrockx



Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,454
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 16 days, 17 hours
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? [Re: Icelander]
#9351253 - 12/02/08 01:02 PM (14 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Orgone said it, sorry, i messed up the reply-to.
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#9351518 - 12/02/08 02:00 PM (14 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
Is reincarnation really that much different than evolution?
Hmm, let's see...
One is basically fiction based upon superstition; the other a well-tested theory based upon facts.
I remember when people used to actually think before posting.
Considering all the biased, offensive, and overtly emotional things I said in this thread, coming back to see that this is what you attack; ill admit this is frustrating.
So mission accomplished eh?
But just to clarify:
I never said that they were the same, I said it is just as well. Just as well, as it relates to the thread. Reincarnation is an acknowledgment of predecessors, just as evolution is.
I did not make the claim that reincarnation is a science, but considered that much eastern thought is harmonious with modern western science.
While I am sure that in the world of orgoneconclusion, this is important, it has nothing to do with the subject matter of this thread, or you at least have not yet demonstrated any meaningful consideration.
|
zannennagara
Found in Space



Registered: 09/25/08
Posts: 433
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? [Re: daytripper23]
#9351792 - 12/02/08 02:55 PM (14 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Ah, so you mean a caste system in terms of what each animal does, separating pets and farm animals (sacred milk cows etc.) from bottom-feeders and pests. I suppose this is a more practical way of looking at animals (maybe humans too?) than a kind of biological complexity ranking.
Yet it will always be our caste system which we apply to them unwittingly. Yes, we give the pets certain rights - they provide us pleasure and companionship and we don't want them abused or killed - but the rights are formed around our judgments of the use of the animals. If some want to use their animals for food, the rights given will be modified - certainly animal carnivores have no concern for the rights given by human vegetarians.
I think there can be sense in wanting to be respectful towards other animals - a game shooter is wasteful and may not be thankful, as part of an inconsiderate worldview, while a hunter can appreciate the gift and share it with others for a basic life need. "Humane" is not, I think, intended to refer to treatment received by animals but treatment given by humans - and there can be human mercy killings, primitive cannibals who won't waste the remnants of battle, situations like the Donner Party.
The idea of rights is nice, but an unwritten (unlined) understanding of respect is preferable to me; it's intuitive and sensible to enjoyment.
-------------------- No debe haber separación, no puede haber definición.
|
mr_kite
The Watcher



Registered: 09/16/02
Posts: 2,577
Loc: shambhala
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? [Re: daytripper23]
#9352686 - 12/02/08 05:49 PM (14 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said: Is reincarnation really that much different than evolution? It is establishing a bond between me and an ape, while at the same time acknowledges our differences.
Id say its just as well...
Yes it's completely different. I still dont have a clue what you mean after reading the rest of the thread. I don't see how the two could complement each other in any logical argument, they're based on completely different ideas, schools of thought, the first is speculative whilst the second is a science.
-------------------- let yourself be silently drawn by the stronger pull of what you really love
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,406
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? *DELETED* [Re: mr_kite]
#9352849 - 12/02/08 06:10 PM (14 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by VeritasReason for deletion: Keep it impersonal, please.
--------------------
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? [Re: mr_kite]
#9352978 - 12/02/08 06:23 PM (14 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I didn't say its the same, or that it was a science.
I said it is just as well, in the context of my argument.
See this is what happened (you should know, you read the whole thread)
What I had originally conceived was a rough idea of an evolutionary caste system, as particular sort of hierarchy, instead of the natural right. It was then pointed by someone else, that hindu caste was established by beliefs in reincarnation, and that is that.
It was not a claim to validity, or anything like that, it was just an association that arose through discussion. By saying just as well, I meant that a caste (the actual subject matter of my posts) might just as easily be based upon evolutionary considerations.
The funny part about this, is what you and OC have taken upon yourself, has nothing to do with my otherwise, incredibly controversial and naive argument about caste, which is something I have no practical understanding, or even very much theoretical knowledge of.
Sure I was expecting a firestorm, but I thought it would actually address aspects of my actual argument.
Anyways, I am pretty surprised you cannot even imagine a parallel between the two. Now I'm intrigued...
|
DoseMeHomie



Registered: 08/15/08
Posts: 2,265
Loc: 'merica
|
Re: Can anyone argue that omnivorous diets are actually more ethical than vegetarian? [Re: xFrockx]
#9576774 - 01/09/09 12:37 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said: If we are to believe that killing vegetables is less immoral than killing animals, then there has to be somthing which distinguishes them which makes the killing right in one case, and wrong in another.
One might say plants do not suffer as animals do.
To that one might say, what is suffering? Are not all animals destined for death? Do we know if plants do not suffer? Perhaps plants do suffer, but we are unaware of how to read their responses to pain and suffering.
Furthermore, how do we know animals suffer? Is there any way to confirm that they do? Would not the claim that animals suffer be equally unprovable as saying that plants suffer?
So with that said, how can we know what is best? Well, I think it would make sense to believe that the optimal diet for our species would be one which would fulfill three things, our appetites, our emotions, and our reason.
As for appetites, our diet is best when it fulfills all of the criteria for keeping us fit and healthy. Vegetarian diets can achieve this, but many take some getting used to to say the least. Our teeth are unlike the teeth of many purely herbivorous animals, and are well suited for a range of applications, including eating poultry, meat, and seafood.
In terms of emotions, it is enjoyable to have a diet that satiates the palate, as well as one which fulfills what desires one may have. Not everyone desires to be a Buddhist monk, and there is much enjoyment to be had for some who partake in meat, moose in particular is somthing I had today, very good, try it and break your vegan ways the happy way.
In terms of reason, our diet needs to be feasible to fulfill. The most feasible diet would have the least overhead (in terms of land, waste, and operating cost), and the most reward (in terms of people fed, safe operations). I would argue that an omnivorous diet provides the widest range of options in adverse conditions. In the case that a season of growing would fail, omnivores would outlive those morally opposed to eating non-vegetative material. The most versatile always prevails over the specialized in the face of adversity.
WORD!
-------------------- The Gospel
|
|