I stumbled upon your blog and It raised a couple of questions I was hoping you could answer for me.
I'm curious how you feel as though you have a better understanding of what is ethical in this world than who or what created it? Since it is very apparent that humans are omnivores and legitimate participants in the circle of life, why should we abstain from hunting and raising livestock for food when it is obvious that we were meant to be a participant in the food chain?
I was also curious why humans have a built in instinct to hunt and why it gives them great joy to be successful and even unsuccessful if it isn't something we are supposed to do?
Lastly, Why do you think that humans are somehow undeserving of the life that was clearly intended for them? Why do you think you know what is best for us and the animals? Do you realize that you don't know that we aren't the best thing for the animals in the long term since we were put here and given the traits to be a very successful species on purpose. Do you think we were a mistake or a glitch in the development of life on this planet, undeserving its resources? How do you know that we aren't an absolutely vital component of life on this planet like any other animal? What would you say if I told you that everything we do as humans, regardless of how you feel about it, is what we are supposed to be doing by design? What if the practice of not using the resources that you were intended to use is an absolute insult to life itself since you feel above the need to participate in it?
Btw, just because we can survive without meat and animal products doesn't in any way mean we should or that it's good for our health. Physically or mentally!
--Andrew
Andrew:
Thanks for your comments. I'll try to answer your questions.
I don't think we have a hunting instinct. If it's an instinct, then it's something every member of our species would possess, but I know that I have no innate desire to kill animals and eat them; quite the opposite. But even if we did have a hunting instinct, ethics does not consist in following our baser instincts. For instance, as men we have a strong basic instinct to mate with every female we see. But ethics puts a restraint on that instinct.
Yes, of course we are part of the food-chain. The healthiest modern-day advice is to eat as low on the food-chain as you are able to (e.g. get the nutrition directly from the corn rather than feeding the corn first to a cow and then getting the nutrition second-hand by eating the cow.) I explain why we are not true omnivores, and why eating meat is unhealthy for our bodies, the planet, and how it contributes to world hunger here: Pain on Your Plate
No, I don't think our species is a "mistake" (though, by its current actions, it has been described as a "cancer upon the earth.") If you believe that "everything we do as humans, regardless of how you feel about it, is what we are supposed to be doing by design" then, being human myself, my refraining from killing animals is also what we're supposed to be doing. A belief that condones all human actions is not a recipe for ethics, and resolves nothing.
Refraining from using non-human animals as a "resource" is not "an insult to life" but the way to save billions of lives and promote a healthier life and planet. The world cannot support 7 billion people on a meat-centered diet. It takes much more land, energy, and resources to produce meat than vegetables. This is why the meat industry has long been known as "a protein factory in reverse" -- we put more in than we get out. It is a luxury diet which turns its back on the many starving people in the world and needlessly ends the lives of billions of non-human animals every year. When better alternatives exist, eating meat is the real insult to life.
--Steve
|
|