new topic (perhaps): design vs evolution vs consciousness

[Guest guest]

Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least two

recent messages that have included statements to the effect that

people were " designed " to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks don't

juice because we're " designed " to eat fruit whole.

 

One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that we're

" designed " to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisor

teeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that " design " , while

vegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, the

length of our digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan

" design " . In other words, the " diet by design " argument goes both ways.

 

I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic " design " ; of course, a

design requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the verbose and

opinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don't

necessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that whatever

free will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a blind

adherence to instinct and hereditary factors.

 

Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and conveniently

adhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs that

they are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most part,

folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their culture's

god or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this list

have consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a variety

of reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged their

upbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element of

choice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do not

believe that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas of

design or evolution.

 

Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think that

people can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of all

kinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to live

the many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their actions.

however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in their

choice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality, and

even their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer they

didn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I believe the world would be

a vastly better place without using animals for food or profit. But i

might be wrong...I do know " know " what's right for the world. Perhaps

if I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design or

evolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefs

about this issue.

 

So, what do you say?

 

blake

[Guest guest]

Blake,

 

I'm in total agreement with you here, I think. I'm no anthropologist,

so I don't really know how humans are " supposed " to eat, based on how

we've evolved (perhaps a better word to use than " designed " ). I

consciously made the choice to become vegetarian, partially, I think,

because I can. What I mean is: if I were living in an area where

economically or physically I could not attain fresh fruits and veg,

grains, etc...and animal products represented the majority of options

available to me - I would not be a vegetarian or vegan. I necessarily

might have to be an omnivore to survive. But, because I have the

ability and, some would say, luxury of choosing, I do. For me, it

doesn't matter how cavemen ate; I know what the research says about

healthy vegetarian and vegan diets, I know how I feel after eating a

completely vegan meal, and wouldn't trade that for a saturated fat

and cholesterol laden steak any day.

 

I, too, have heard both sides' argument that our bodies were designed

to eat a certain way, I have also heard that if mankind continues

eating the way we do, our bodies will evolve to be able to process

high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils as efficiently as it

processes watermelon today. It may take hundreds or thousands of

years, but it will happen. The reason we have heart disease,

diabetes, and all the other " liefstyle diseases " now is because we

all changed our diet so drastically in such a short amount of time.

Interesting.

 

Another thing that continually amazes me (regarding the ethical

aspect of veganism) is how much cognative dissonance exists in

mainstream society. I'm amazed, looking back over my own life, how

much I ignored once I knew the truth, too. I don't know what changed,

or what exactly the " tipping point " was for me though ...glad I am

where I am today though.

 

 

Just my 2 cents,

Jolene

 

 

 

 

- In , " sebsi23 " <mbw wrote:

>

> Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least two

> recent messages that have included statements to the effect that

> people were " designed " to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks

don't

> juice because we're " designed " to eat fruit whole.

>

> One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that we're

> " designed " to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisor

> teeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that " design " ,

while

> vegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, the

> length of our digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan

> " design " . In other words, the " diet by design " argument goes both

ways.

>

> I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic " design " ; of course, a

> design requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the verbose

and

> opinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don't

> necessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that whatever

> free will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a blind

> adherence to instinct and hereditary factors.

>

> Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and conveniently

> adhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs

that

> they are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most

part,

> folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their culture's

> god or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this list

> have consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a variety

> of reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged

their

> upbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element of

> choice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do not

> believe that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas of

> design or evolution.

>

> Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think that

> people can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of

all

> kinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to live

> the many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their actions.

> however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in their

> choice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality, and

> even their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer they

> didn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I believe the world would

be

> a vastly better place without using animals for food or profit. But

i

> might be wrong...I do know " know " what's right for the world.

Perhaps

> if I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design or

> evolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefs

> about this issue.

>

> So, what do you say?

>

> blake

>

[Guest guest]

I certainly don't believe in any conscious "design" of humans.

Our bodies have evolved, just like everything else around us.

I don't recall, nor could I find my own reference to how we were "designed". I did say if nature intended for us to eat vitamins and juice, we'd be able to pick the supplements from trees and stick straws into produce and suck it down.

 

Fruit and veggies exist in their wholeness, they aren't separated into parts.

 

I choose to eat plants because of the reading and listening I've done, of studies (on humans, not animals), because of my own personal experience, and a myriad of other reasons, moral, environmental, world hunger, etc...

 

You're right. It is CHOICE. We do have choices here. And because I have a choice, I choose to eat plants.

 

There is a great body of literature about what is wrong with meat and dairy, not only the industrialized version.

 

It might be true that we can eat meat in moderation. But why would we?

 

Marcy

 

 

-

sebsi23

Tuesday, July 24, 2007 9:27 AM

new topic (perhaps): design vs evolution vs consciousness

 

 

Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least tworecent messages that have included statements to the effect thatpeople were "designed" to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks don'tjuice because we're "designed" to eat fruit whole. One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that we're"designed" to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisorteeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that "design", whilevegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, thelength of our digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan"design". In other words, the "diet by design" argument goes both ways. I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic "design"; of course, adesign requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the verbose andopinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don'tnecessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that whateverfree will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a blindadherence to instinct and hereditary factors. Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and convenientlyadhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs thatthey are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most part,folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their culture'sgod or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this listhave consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a varietyof reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged theirupbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element ofchoice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do notbelieve that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas ofdesign or evolution. Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think thatpeople can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of allkinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to livethe many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their actions.however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in theirchoice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality, andeven their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer theydidn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I believe the world would bea vastly better place without using animals for food or profit. But imight be wrong...I do know "know" what's right for the world. Perhapsif I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design orevolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefsabout this issue. So, what do you say? blake

[Guest guest]

Hi Blake

 

Interesting comments and questions.

 

I don't personally believe in a " creator deity " , but do believe that our

bodies have certain elements that make them more amenable to a vegan diet

than a meat-eating one. When I use the term " designed " (if I ever do), it

does not intrinsically mean to me that someone specifically designed our

bodies, but rather as a simple, if inaccurate use of a word which people

will generally understand to mean that our bodies follow a particular

pattern (i.e. our bodies generally follow the same " rules " ). Of course, one

of the problems with our language is that it has developed in a society

which accepted as absolute fact that there was a creator deity, and as such

many words which we commonly use have that concept at their base: even the

most atheist of people refers to " laws of science " , or " laws of nature " -

whose laws?

 

One interesting thought - you mention that you are atheist and don't believe

in a designer, but then talk of karmic consequences. Surely the concept of

Karma requires someone or something to be in control of our destinies?

 

BB

Peter

 

-

" sebsi23 " <mbw

 

Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:27 PM

new topic (perhaps): design vs evolution vs

consciousness

 

 

> Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least two

> recent messages that have included statements to the effect that

> people were " designed " to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks don't

> juice because we're " designed " to eat fruit whole.

>

> One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that we're

> " designed " to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisor

> teeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that " design " , while

> vegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, the

> length of our digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan

> " design " . In other words, the " diet by design " argument goes both ways.

>

> I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic " design " ; of course, a

> design requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the verbose and

> opinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don't

> necessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that whatever

> free will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a blind

> adherence to instinct and hereditary factors.

>

> Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and conveniently

> adhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs that

> they are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most part,

> folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their culture's

> god or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this list

> have consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a variety

> of reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged their

> upbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element of

> choice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do not

> believe that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas of

> design or evolution.

>

> Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think that

> people can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of all

> kinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to live

> the many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their actions.

> however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in their

> choice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality, and

> even their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer they

> didn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I believe the world would be

> a vastly better place without using animals for food or profit. But i

> might be wrong...I do know " know " what's right for the world. Perhaps

> if I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design or

> evolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefs

> about this issue.

>

> So, what do you say?

>

> blake

>

>

>

> To send an email to -

>

[Guest guest]

That is very interesting. I have many of the same feelings/thoughts.Here is a great article on B12:http://www.rawfoodtalk.com/showthread.php?t=2910Scott--- zuzu37 wrote:"jmaine37" <zuzu37 Subject: Re: new topic (perhaps): design vs evolution vs consciousnessTue, 24 Jul 2007 16:55:15 -0000

 

 

 

Blake,

 

I'm in total agreement with you here, I think. I'm no anthropologist,

so I don't really know how humans are "supposed" to eat, based on how

we've evolved (perhaps a better word to use than "designed"). I

consciously made the choice to become vegetarian, partially, I think,

because I can. What I mean is: if I were living in an area where

economically or physically I could not attain fresh fruits and veg,

grains, etc...and animal products represented the majority of options

available to me - I would not be a vegetarian or vegan. I necessarily

might have to be an omnivore to survive. But, because I have the

ability and, some would say, luxury of choosing, I do. For me, it

doesn't matter how cavemen ate; I know what the research says about

healthy vegetarian and vegan diets, I know how I feel after eating a

completely vegan meal, and wouldn't trade that for a saturated fat

and cholesterol laden steak any day.

 

I, too, have heard both sides' argument that our bodies were designed

to eat a certain way, I have also heard that if mankind continues

eating the way we do, our bodies will evolve to be able to process

high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils as efficiently as it

processes watermelon today. It may take hundreds or thousands of

years, but it will happen. The reason we have heart disease,

diabetes, and all the other "liefstyle diseases" now is because we

all changed our diet so drastically in such a short amount of time.

Interesting.

 

Another thing that continually amazes me (regarding the ethical

aspect of veganism) is how much cognative dissonance exists in

mainstream society. I'm amazed, looking back over my own life, how

much I ignored once I knew the truth, too. I don't know what changed,

or what exactly the "tipping point" was for me though ...glad I am

where I am today though.

 

Just my 2 cents,

Jolene

 

Learn about the power of raw foods at ---> http://www.rawfoods.com

[Guest guest]

Whats all this then? What about evolution, fossils etc, dont they prove that mankind was an arable farmer before turning to hunting? Did I miss something? Sorry, ran out of beer............... The Valley Vegan..............metalscarab <metalscarab wrote: Hi BlakeInteresting comments and questions.I don't personally believe in a "creator deity", but do believe that ourbodies have certain elements that make them more

amenable to a vegan dietthan a meat-eating one. When I use the term "designed" (if I ever do), itdoes not intrinsically mean to me that someone specifically designed ourbodies, but rather as a simple, if inaccurate use of a word which peoplewill generally understand to mean that our bodies follow a particularpattern (i.e. our bodies generally follow the same "rules"). Of course, oneof the problems with our language is that it has developed in a societywhich accepted as absolute fact that there was a creator deity, and as suchmany words which we commonly use have that concept at their base: even themost atheist of people refers to "laws of science", or "laws of nature" -whose laws?One interesting thought - you mention that you are atheist and don't believein a designer, but then talk of karmic consequences. Surely the concept ofKarma requires someone or something to be in control of our

destinies?BBPeter-"sebsi23" <mbwTuesday, July 24, 2007 5:27 PM new topic (perhaps): design vs evolution vsconsciousness> Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least two> recent messages that have included statements to the effect that> people were "designed" to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks don't> juice because we're "designed" to eat fruit whole.>> One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that we're> "designed" to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisor> teeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that "design", while> vegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, the> length of our

digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan> "design". In other words, the "diet by design" argument goes both ways.>> I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic "design"; of course, a> design requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the verbose and> opinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don't> necessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that whatever> free will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a blind> adherence to instinct and hereditary factors.>> Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and conveniently> adhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs that> they are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most part,> folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their culture's> god or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this list> have

consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a variety> of reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged their> upbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element of> choice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do not> believe that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas of> design or evolution.>> Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think that> people can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of all> kinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to live> the many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their actions.> however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in their> choice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality, and> even their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer they> didn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I

believe the world would be> a vastly better place without using animals for food or profit. But i> might be wrong...I do know "know" what's right for the world. Perhaps> if I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design or> evolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefs> about this issue.>> So, what do you say?>> blake>>>> To send an email to - >

[Guest guest]

I think humans can eat a little animal product and stay healthy, but

he same can be said about all unhealthy things :-)

 

I don't think there is an overall entity who has designed us to be

one way. I think evolution is more likely. After all a large

proportion of the population do not have the enzymes to digest cow's

milk - so presumably they have not evolved to eat a substance that is

basically unnatural to them.

 

Jo

 

, " sebsi23 " <mbw wrote:

>

> Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least two

> recent messages that have included statements to the effect that

> people were " designed " to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks

don't

> juice because we're " designed " to eat fruit whole.

>

> One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that we're

> " designed " to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisor

> teeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that " design " ,

while

> vegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, the

> length of our digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan

> " design " . In other words, the " diet by design " argument goes both

ways.

>

> I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic " design " ; of course, a

> design requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the verbose

and

> opinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don't

> necessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that whatever

> free will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a blind

> adherence to instinct and hereditary factors.

>

> Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and conveniently

> adhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs

that

> they are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most

part,

> folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their culture's

> god or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this list

> have consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a variety

> of reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged

their

> upbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element of

> choice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do not

> believe that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas of

> design or evolution.

>

> Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think that

> people can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of

all

> kinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to live

> the many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their actions.

> however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in their

> choice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality, and

> even their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer they

> didn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I believe the world would

be

> a vastly better place without using animals for food or profit. But

i

> might be wrong...I do know " know " what's right for the world.

Perhaps

> if I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design or

> evolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefs

> about this issue.

>

> So, what do you say?

>

> blake

>

[Guest guest]

I think I head a news article a while back that said the earliest

human remains (fozen somewhere) had proved to be vegan.

 

Jo

 

, Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:

>

> Whats all this then?

> What about evolution, fossils etc, dont they prove that mankind

was an arable farmer before turning to hunting?

> Did I miss something?

> Sorry, ran out of beer...............

>

> The Valley Vegan..............

>

> metalscarab <metalscarab wrote:

> Hi Blake

>

> Interesting comments and questions.

>

> I don't personally believe in a " creator deity " , but do believe

that our

> bodies have certain elements that make them more amenable to a

vegan diet

> than a meat-eating one. When I use the term " designed " (if I ever

do), it

> does not intrinsically mean to me that someone specifically

designed our

> bodies, but rather as a simple, if inaccurate use of a word which

people

> will generally understand to mean that our bodies follow a

particular

> pattern (i.e. our bodies generally follow the same " rules " ). Of

course, one

> of the problems with our language is that it has developed in a

society

> which accepted as absolute fact that there was a creator deity, and

as such

> many words which we commonly use have that concept at their base:

even the

> most atheist of people refers to " laws of science " , or " laws of

nature " -

> whose laws?

>

> One interesting thought - you mention that you are atheist and

don't believe

> in a designer, but then talk of karmic consequences. Surely the

concept of

> Karma requires someone or something to be in control of our

destinies?

>

> BB

> Peter

>

> -

> " sebsi23 " <mbw

>

> Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:27 PM

> new topic (perhaps): design vs evolution vs

> consciousness

>

> > Ok, before you go bananas, let me say i'm intrigued by at least

two

> > recent messages that have included statements to the effect that

> > people were " designed " to eat a certain way, i.e. certain folks

don't

> > juice because we're " designed " to eat fruit whole.

> >

> > One of the big arguments in the carnivore vs vegan war is that

we're

> > " designed " to eat one way or another. Carnivores cite our incisor

> > teeth, need for b12, and other items as proof of that " design " ,

while

> > vegans cite the fact that only calves should drink cow's milk, the

> > length of our digestive tract, and so forth as proof of a vegan

> > " design " . In other words, the " diet by design " argument goes both

ways.

> >

> > I'm an atheist and don't believe in a cosmic " design " ; of course,

a

> > design requires a designer. but I'm curious about what the

verbose and

> > opinionated folks on this list think about this issue. I don't

> > necessary believe in dietary evolution either; I think that

whatever

> > free will and advanced consciousness we have tends to negate a

blind

> > adherence to instinct and hereditary factors.

> >

> > Personally, O think 99% of all human beings blindly and

conveniently

> > adhere to the language, diet, social mores, and religious beliefs

that

> > they are taught in infancy and young adulthood. So, for the most

part,

> > folks eat what they're raised to eat (or believe in their

culture's

> > god or gods) and don't think twice about it. The folks on this

list

> > have consciously and conscientiously chosen their diet for a

variety

> > of reasons, and have thereby directly confronted and challenged

their

> > upbringing about food and nutrition. By injecting this element of

> > choice and reflection, not to mention ethics or compassion, I do

not

> > believe that we act in any way that comports with standard ideas

of

> > design or evolution.

> >

> > Perhaps in opposition to many vegans/vegetarians, I think that

> > people can have perfectly healthy diets eating animal products of

all

> > kinds in moderation. It's a choice they make, and will have to

live

> > the many ethical, environment, and karmic results of their

actions.

> > however, I do not think design or evolution plays any role in

their

> > choice; again, it's their upbringing, their system of morality,

and

> > even their bloodlust that influences their decision. I'd prefer

they

> > didn't pursue that kind of lifestyle, and I believe the world

would be

> > a vastly better place without using animals for food or profit.

But i

> > might be wrong...I do know " know " what's right for the world.

Perhaps

> > if I believed in an overarching plan or dogma (like design or

> > evolution) about what we eat, I'd have similarly dogmatic beliefs

> > about this issue.

> >

> > So, what do you say?

> >

> > blake

> >

> >

> >

> > To send an email to -

 

> >