cannablism, and should we eat meat?
 

i LOVE to eat, i love food, i think everything on the earth is here for us to use in the most honorable way, not to waste it, but use it efficiently and effectively. this includes animals. they are here for us to eat and use (bones make tools, hides make clothes, etc).

then again.....

i look at my cat, he looks at me, i swear he is trying to tell me something. he puts his paw on me and looks at me, and i swear he is trying to communicate. this would indicate some level of intelligence.

raised catholic, i was taught animals don't have souls. now i wonder if that's not quite true.

what if we are totally wrong and animals have souls and feelings and shouldn't be eaten?

at what point do we not eat something? we don't eat each other, because that is wrong. why? because we can talk and think and reason? because eating another human makes us sick (physically our bodies are not fans of other humans).

why is cannibalism wrong? some cultures think eating your slain enemy honors him and gives you his strength.

what if animals have reason, think, but just can't communicate in a way we understand? what if we are wrong, and animals have souls, or at least have what we consider advanced mental capabilities? then would we stop eating them?

but if they are not to be eaten, what are they here for? does everything living need a purpose to live?

animals can communicate with each other, so they are that much advanced.

sorry i'm rambling, i hope you understand the question, i guess there are two.

1) should we eat animals? what would it take for humans to say "oh crap, we were wrong, we shouldn't eat them." ?

2) why is cannibalism (eating another human) wrong?

Souls can't really be quantified, so I think I'll leave that alone.

Some people are okay with eating animals (such as myself), and some aren't. Some of the animal eaters do so purely out of necessity, and some do so for pleasure. Some of the non-animal eaters do so out of protest against animal treatment, and others do so simply because they're uncomfortable. I don't think you'll find a definitive answer on whether or not it's wrong ethically, so you have to fall back to necessity. It's generally not necessary to eat meat to stay alive, but it's certainly helpful. Meats contain combinations of nutrients that are hard to find elsewhere, though it's not impossible. We developed as a species eating meat, among other things.

Why is cannibalism wrong? I don't think it's always wrong. If the survival of my family or friends depended on them cooking and ingesting my body after I die, I'd be okay with it. I might even have preparation suggestions (I think I'd be good slow-baked with a spiced cherry sauce or maybe braised with garlic, onion, bell pepper, ancho chilies, tomatoes, and spiced with cumin and cayenne). I'd be pretty pissed, though, if some guy hunted me, killed me, and then proceeded to eat me all for pleasure. It's about the intrinsic sanctity of life, the principle upon which laws and ethics against murder are based. Murder out of necessity is recognized almost universally as at least a gray area, or not totally wrong. Things like self defense and survival are taken into account. Killing for selfish or cruel reasons, however, is generally regarded as plain wrong.

1) I'm all for eating animals. I take a look at the design of my teeth, think back to the book I read that illustrated how meat is responsible for our larger brains, and don't worry about it. I try to balance out the amount of meat I eat versus other things, being a good omnivore is also having a balanced diet.

2) Probably not surprising, but I wouldn't have any problem eating another person in a survival / emergency situation. Given the chance to do such without any legal issues, I'd try a CostCo paper cup sample of BBQ human. But is it wrong? It's taboo and a crime in most societies.

Question #1

Our bodies were designed to eat meat and vegetation. Therefore, I believe it's natural to eat both. Not to say anything's wrong or unnatural about being a vegetarian; I just don't agree that anything's wrong with meat in your diet.

Question #2

Cannibalism's wrong in our society because of the murder that would usually be involved, I believe. That's how humans work. We will hunt and kill a bear just to hang his head on a plaque, but no way could we possibly kill one of our own...

I disagree that murder is inherently wrong. I believe it's a part of our primal instincts. Violence runs through every living thing and promotes survival of the fittest, but our society, as we know it, can't function under those terms...

Cannibalism is wrong, yes. Let's get that out of the way. But the two issues are connected, aren't they? We make these moral questions, not questions of necessity. If it were necessary for us to eat animals, including humans, to survive, then we'd be having another conversation altogether. But it's not necessary—unless you live in places such as Tibet or the Arctic.

We weren't "designed" to eat meat; through the process of natural selection, we kept the characteristics necessary for us to be able to eat meat and use it as a food source. But many animals can do this, even the ones we consider herbivores.

But this doesn't mean we need to eat meat. Just as we can eat mean, we can survive without it. We are generalists unlike any species on the planet. We have high intelligence and bodies that can adapt to many things. We aren't the most adaptable in a purely physiological sense, but we do well considering our other capabilities.

That said, this is a moral question. Given that we don't need to eat meat, that we do assumes the following:

• We have no moral objection to eating animals.
• We are ignorant to the suffering of animals.

I think it's morally wrong to eat animals based on the fact that they must suffer for us to do it. I eat meat, yes, but I'm also a moral wretch. I at one time wanted to be vegan, but I didn't have the resolve and the willpower. I at least acknowledge the flaws in my ways. I create suffering needlessly. I have moral shortcomings.

Many of us live in societies where eating animals isn't necessary. Actually, one of the best ways to reduce instances of environmental/nutritional causes of disease is to adopt a vegetarian, if not vegan, diet. Going vegan is actually good for us.

With very few (and arguably trivial) exceptions, there is nothing in meat that we cannot get from plant sources. We are far more dependent on our plant sources of food for survival than we are on meat sources.

From a moral standpoint, we should not eat meat. But we can and do. And we're all wishy-washy about it. It's okay to eat cows, pigs, and chickens, but eating dogs and cats is barbaric.

Curious beings we are.

(We should all do a TFP field trip to a slaughterhouse, if not a factory farm.)

eating meat is not necessary. we get the required amounts of protein, a complete protein, from beans and rice, hummus and pita, split pea and bread, etc etc. we dont NEED animal meat, but damn it tasted good.

for survival, we don't need animal meat. it's more "aesthetic" than required. but it does give us the nutrition we need.

ive eaten dog. not the best. i've eaten other animals. now i'm wondering if it was morally wrong.

i KNOW my meat comes from living animals. if everyone knew it, would it change how we eat?

I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone surprised to find that chicken breast comes from a chicken. Now, if you're saying they'd be mortified by the conditions we keep our chickens in before slaughtering them, I totally agree, but I think everyone is more or less aware that they're eating the flesh of a dead animal. People on the whole seem comfortable with the killing of animals for eating, in fact we're almost too comfortable. Here in the US, people on average eat waaay more meat than they need and it's started causing problems, but I don't want to turn this into an anti-meat industry thing.

Morally, it's a gray area.

No, they wouldn't be SURPRISED that it comes from a chicken-- but the way we package meat makes it very easy to just not think about it.

I think, ideally, if you're going to eat meat, you should have some part in the process of killing and preparing it. Unfortunately, that's not always practical or realistic.

i've killed a chicken that i ate. i knew he was alive, walking around, etc. lots of people dont think about it, the meat in the store is presented in a sterile, detached fashion. i'm willing to bet many people, kids and adults, don't consciously understand the meat in the Styrofoam package, was walking around not too long ago.

What people don't often think about are things such as the fact that pigs have the intelligence of the average 3-year-old child.

It's not so much about whether we're buying carcasses. It's about realizing just how much the animal suffered during the course of their short lives.

I suspect that if faced with starvation, your average American would be able to take the head off a chicken, remove the feathers, skin it, gut it, clean it, and cook it. Yes, I suspect people in Safeway looking at that package aren't thinking about the animal before and while it was killed, but I don't necessarily think that we're ignorant of the meat's origin. I'm fine with the killing of an animal to eat it. I've gone fishing before, so I've had to kill and clean a bass. I felt a little guilty after eating every last bite of it, but that was only because I was a little kid at the time.

---------- Post added at 01:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:22 PM ----------

Me: Wilbur, it's time for dinner!
Pig: No!
Me: Comon, you need to eat!
Pig: No!
Me: *picks up pig and puts it in high chair*
Pig: *throws tantrum*

Okay, who else is ready to go kill some pigs?

I have no trouble eating meat. What I would prefer is that we do away with the industrialization of how we raise and slaughter our animals that we use for food. The way we raise and process animals on an industrial scale is not only horrible for the short lives of these animals but also to our own health.

It would mean that meat would become more costly. It would mean that we would eat less meat as there would be less available to eat.

We should eat less meat (heck we should eat less food, but that's another issue).

We should also eat more of the entire animal. I think offal should find it's way onto people's tables more often (other than in hotdogs).


As for cannibalism, the issue is one of murder and not the consumption of human flesh per se.

I was vegetarian for four or five years, until I stopped taking care of myself and stopped healing.

Eating meat is kind of disgusting, but I enjoy it. I'm selfish and guilty. Every time I see a pig or a fish or a cow or a chicken I apologize. Turkeys get no sympathy, but that's another story.

I don't want to eat human meat. I don't think I would, even in the direst of situations. I don't want to feel compelled to apologize every time I see a person. -_-

What about human dairy products? You know, human milk, yogurt, cottage cheese....

Only if we get it from the tap.

Yeah, retained ability = design. It also reminds me of the image attachment below.

...

Can we eat meat? Sure. We've proved through through thousands of years of evolution culminating in Animal 57 ("Chicken McNugget").

Should we eat meat? It's damaging to the balance in the environment to consume more than a fraction of your intake in meat.

If they have all that crap, why do they need to eat you? ;)

A rare glimpse into the oddball parenting of WillRavel.

Filler.

Because there's no actual food in there, except maybe tomatoes. It's all seasoning.

I meant to point out the difference between "design" the verb/adverb and "design" the noun. It is in our "design" that we can eat meat, but nothing actively "designed" us to do that.

Using the same theory, our ability to adopt and thrive on a vegan diet is a survival mechanism. Like I said, we're generalists. Our ability to use meat as a rich source of nutrients such as protein, vitamin B, and iron, as well as our ability to survive on plant life pretty much exclusively, is a result of our many generations of natural selection. Those species who fail to adapt to their environment? They certainly aren't on the menu anymore.

I think there is nothing wrong with eating meat, provided that the animals are treated humanely while alive, slaughtered humanely, and that they are not reasoning creatures. For example, among other reasons, I see nothing wrong with eating sheep or cows, because I've spent time on a farm, and I know that both kinds of creatures are dumb as stumps, and while they may have rudimentary awareness of self and surroundings, there's nothing "there." Whereas, I would never eat a whale, because, having listened to whalesong, and read up on whale society, it seems pretty clear these things are as intelligent and aware as we are, even if their intelligence seems to express itself very differently.

I also agree that we were designed to be omnivorous, and that means there's nothing wrong with eating meat, so long as it's not to excess, or done with cruelty.

But I have said for a long time that if a person couldn't bring themselves to kill an animal, they probably shouldn't eat meat. I have a couple of friends who are shochetim (Jewish ritual slaughterers), and I've seen them do their work, and I have no problem eating meat.

If I didn't keep kosher, I would eat nothing but free range, organic meat; since I do keep kosher, I eat free-range, organic meat when I can, and if not, I try to allay my concerns by reminding myself that-- when the system works properly-- the laws of kashrut ought to prevent me from consuming animals that have been severely mistreated or killed improperly. Of course, as we saw two years ago with the scandal at Rubashkin's kosher meats in Iowa, sometimes those who are supposed to make the system work, instead corrupt the system for their own ends, which is always a worry. But I still think-- especially now that Rubashkin is almost out of business, and their plant is being overseen by the government-- that more kosher meat is ethical than non-kosher meat, at least in the United States.

As for cannibalism, it would depend. Cannibalism from necessity (your soccer team is stranded in the Andes, etc.) seems a no-brainer to me: you do what you have to do to survive. Cannibalism from choice ("Honey, you want lamb chops tonight?" "No, I really feel in the mood for a Nicaraguan. Something juicy, like a mechanic, or that guy who cuts the Sanchez's lawn.") is not okay, IMO. We are intelligent, aware, reasoning beings (and, I believe, created in the image of God), and as such, we may or may not have the right to deprive other humans of their lives for reasons of justice, but not for reasons of culinary appetite.

Dunno bout you, but I call ancho peppers, bell peppers, and onions food. The spiced cherry sauce would provide lots of energy too, without me having to resort to consuming Mr. Ravel.

This may have been said, but animals eat other animals. Even chimpanzees will eat the young of other chimpanzees when other meat is scarce.

I love animals, but I understand they are part of the circle of life. Just as they will eat us if they can.

If God did not want us to eat animals, he would not have made them from meat.

"Slaughtered humanely"

I consider that an oxymoron.

Can humans be slaughtered humanely too?

I generally think animals would prefer to live. What's humane about denying them that and killing them instead?

The problem I have with this is that other animals don't have the same ability to reason as we do. You can't tell a cheetah to just chillax and have a salad instead of chase down that gazelle. And it wouldn't do any good because cheetahs couldn't survive on a strictly vegetarian diet. It's not in their makeup. They've evolved as highly specialized hunters for a reason.

We do think about these things, and have options. This thread posed a moral question, not a scientific one based on natural patterns. The "circle of life" doesn't apply to us as it does with most of the animal kingdom. We have a choice, and we think about things beyond necessity. We have other capabilities, and some would argue we have other responsibilities.

If God wanted us to fly, he'd have given us wings. And if he wanted us to survive in harsh elements, we'd be covered in fur....

The stigma of Cannibalism is a social agreement - like all moral codes it comes from a common need a society shares. Any religious, philosophical or lawful extension of this social agreement doesn't elevate it to a higher level or give it deeper meaning. For example: the issue of souls really doesn't have any merit in the argument - those who don't believe in souls still don't want to be eaten by their coworkers.

We are at the top of the food chain and want to remain there. Nobody wants to be eaten. Other humans are our only natural predator. Hunger is a common challenged faced by human being and we want to be certain that we or our families are not threatened by hungry humans. We want others to die of starvation rather than commit murder in order to survive. I'm sure there are biological barriers as well. Cannibalism can be dangerous in a species. I believe it to be that simple.

Eating animal...I'll get to that another time

Let's take murder out of the equation - if someone dies of natural causes, is eating them still wrong? I can think of good reasons not to engage in cannibalism, such as disease spread, psychological ramifications, and the ick factor, but nothing compelling enough for me to say that it's wrong.

What if "God" is made out of meat?!

:hyper:

..and we're also made out of meat, so cannibalism must be okay!

/Ft. Benning, early 2003

unless you are in the ocean, surfing, or in a jungle walking around doing shit. then humans are the least of your problems....

B_G... wow. That would be one dairy farm I would visit!

I think there is a difference between our ancestors eating meat and civilization now eating meat.

Then you had a very low human population hunting and eating an over abundance of animals to survive.

Now we have an over abundance of humans raising animals for the specific purpose of slaughtering and eating. Unfortunately the animals are not grazing on a plain somewhere, happily living their life until someone spears them to survive.

They are raised in deplorable conditions, are they thinking? I don't know, they are then slaughtered in the same deplorable conditions, butchered and packed up for your local grocery meat case.

I can't answer if we should eat meat or not. I do. With much pleasure. But I was raised this way. When you grow up "hunting" at your local supermarket, the triumvirate of chicken, beef and pork becomes so normal that you don't reflect on where it came from. It's a steak in styrofoam and plastic wrap, not an animal. You're not choosing a cow from a herd and overcoming it to survive, you are buying what you grew up eating and nowadays are trying to make "healthy oven fried chicken" to replace what Grandma made.

Maybe given enough time, enlightenment and forward thinking, children will be raised not thinking pork chops and hamburger are a way of life. That may be an ideal world. Is there enough arable land on the planet to grow plant based crops to feed everyone? I have no idea.

Cannablism? In situations of genuine life or death I don't think it's necessarily wrong. At that point, you may not have a choice, the survival instinct will let or make you eat human flesh if that is what you have to do to survive. POW's drank their own urine, ate their own vomit, ate bugs, maggot infested meat, anything to survive.

I think the gross factor will stop all but the most depraved in situations that are not life or death.

I travel with a bottle of A-1 sauce if I know that my plane will be flying over mountains.

Just in case.

"The time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men." - Leonardo da Vinci

I don't think this is very realistic, no matter how much genius the man otherwise had to offer. It's a nice thought, but we'd have to remove ourselves completely from the natural order of things to accomplish this.

I personally believe we should be as humane as possible, and try to have habits, eating and otherwise, that are more ecologically sustainable, whether it be eating meat or plant material. This and I'm a huge hypocrite because I have made no effort to do so. Well I'm personally humane, but I haven't ensured that my sources of food have made any effort.

You make it sound mystical. It's not that we'd have to stop eating to survive or anything. We'd still need food. How is not eating meat a complete removal from the "natural order of things."

Look at our current level of technology and means of living in the developed world. How would something as simple as not eating animal flesh anymore remove us any further from "nature" than we already have otherwise?

How many other species have a large segment of their population who don't know how to adequately hunt or forage?
How many other species have "home comfort" and indoor plumbing technology?
How many other species communicate instantaneously through wires and over the air at distances that span the planet and reach beyond its atmosphere?
How many other species have gone to outer space?

We are technologically advanced, but we are also "domesticated." Turn us loose in the wild and many of us will die, just like animals raised in captivity.

We are already far removed from this "natural order of things." Whether we eat meat is of little consequence in that matter.

I think one can look at this at an individual level and a group level. There are group laws and individual laws or ethics. For the group (all of humanity and all the life that supports us) it may become wrong to eat meat if we are endangering ourselves by taking too many animals out of the equation. As it is now, that's certainly not the case for the majority.

Individually, of course, its up to each person. For me, humans aren't "better" per se than animals, but we do have the capacity to feel more suffering. Morality is about rationality, and I don't want to eat humans not because its immoral but because emotionally its ick. Technically though, I don't think its immoral to eat an already dead human.

who needs a field trip when we got this:


i had to stop watching it mid movie. but I picked back up later on.

Completely random question, perhaps semi-related and possibly weird.

To the people who would consider eating human meat in certain situations... would you feel differently about eating someone you knew? Would you have a preference as to which gender you'd prefer to eat?