Thanks again, Wolf. Apreciate the information, too! It is a weird little world, isn't it? Cannibalism - as I said elsewhere! Of course it is; to insist anything else is, logically speaking, merely self-interested, overly-pedantic, and oozing with denial. One eats in light of and against a backdrop of the weight of tradition. Corpse-crunching is ritualistic and rehearsal-bourne, at bottom; rather than the product of thorough-going, factual, and informed choice. It causes a schizm, I think - a kind of abattoir-denial! As I said, if the process of meat-production is no big issue, put a meaningful and visible connection to it on the the packaging. Tell the truth. If it's ok to kill animals for food, then no self-respecting carn will be against that, surely. If not, then eating meat is based upon blind tradition, elective ignorance, and denial. A large psychological price to pay, in my view.
i think you are right. the acid test has always been for me whether a carnivore can kill his dinner? in my experience the answer is 'not bloody likely' and then a closed eyed, closed mind but opened jaw approach. out of my family there are two of us that are less than inclined to eat meat and another who has some serious issues. i believe that eventually mankind will move away from eating meat. apart from the french that is (who i love) who eat anything that creeps, crawls, walks, swims or flies.
Did you know they are now able to grow meat which was never alive (in the animal sense)?
Absolutely, meat industry as is will be a memory in time.
I've had a bit of fun with these posts. Though I do have very strong views, they are based upon logic and reality as opposed to emotion, metaphysics. I think the meat argument is illogical, based upon daft ideas, and does not hold water politically, psychologically, environmentally, socially etc. It's unreflexive, I feel; a received idea; a kind of intellectual laziness.
I'm sure this might piss people off. But I'm willing to engage in a proper discussion, if anyone wants to test their corpse-crunching resolve. I am by no means as free of 'guilt' as I'd like to be, as I said earlier. It's damn near impossible in our society. But, despite this, I think it is fine to discuss as an ideal. I think man isbest when he forgrounds idealism, rather than making fatalistic excuses and apologies from a pragmatic stand-point. It's about the kind of world we want, I feel; not about shoulder-shrugging resignation. That feels lazy and weak to me. That didn't drag us from the caves.
5 comments:
seriously, it's not that far-fetched.
and incidentally, there's no way of telling a human cyst from, say, a bovine one...
shit.
everyday i regret not having taken pictures when i was slaughtering rams. i was too busy sorting out the entrails.
great posts.
more!
blood on the tracks
Thanks again, Wolf. Apreciate the information, too! It is a weird little world, isn't it? Cannibalism - as I said elsewhere! Of course it is; to insist anything else is, logically speaking, merely self-interested, overly-pedantic, and oozing with denial. One eats in light of and against a backdrop of the weight of tradition. Corpse-crunching is ritualistic and rehearsal-bourne, at bottom; rather than the product of thorough-going, factual, and informed choice. It causes a schizm, I think - a kind of abattoir-denial! As I said, if the process of meat-production is no big issue, put a meaningful and visible connection to it on the the packaging. Tell the truth. If it's ok to kill animals for food, then no self-respecting carn will be against that, surely. If not, then eating meat is based upon blind tradition, elective ignorance, and denial. A large psychological price to pay, in my view.
i think you are right. the acid test has always been for me whether a carnivore can kill his dinner?
in my experience the answer is 'not bloody likely' and then a closed eyed, closed mind but opened jaw approach. out of my family there are two of us that are less than inclined to eat meat and another who has some serious issues. i believe that eventually mankind will move away from eating meat. apart from the french that is (who i love) who eat anything that creeps, crawls, walks, swims or flies.
Gosh, yes, The French will be the last, for sure!
Did you know they are now able to grow meat which was never alive (in the animal sense)?
Absolutely, meat industry as is will be a memory in time.
I've had a bit of fun with these posts. Though I do have very strong views, they are based upon logic and reality as opposed to emotion, metaphysics. I think the meat argument is illogical, based upon daft ideas, and does not hold water politically, psychologically, environmentally, socially etc. It's unreflexive, I feel; a received idea; a kind of intellectual laziness.
I'm sure this might piss people off. But I'm willing to engage in a proper discussion, if anyone wants to test their corpse-crunching resolve. I am by no means as free of 'guilt' as I'd like to be, as I said earlier. It's damn near impossible in our society. But, despite this, I think it is fine to discuss as an ideal. I think man isbest when he forgrounds idealism, rather than making fatalistic excuses and apologies from a pragmatic stand-point. It's about the kind of world we want, I feel; not about shoulder-shrugging resignation. That feels lazy and weak to me. That didn't drag us from the caves.
Arc at me (once again).
Post a Comment