reply to post by Astyanax
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Golden Rule
The shark is a predator and you are a predator as well. Correct?
Correct. I agree with you that it is well to remember this, and to realize what it implies.
What PETA is trying to achieve really is just a preliminary step - the conscious change of diet is just a primer really. The hopeful direction
really is that human beings can transform their nature from the primitive predatory origins to a non-predatory life-form. It is an experiment really,
and probably one on which the survival of our species may well depend.
If our survival as a species depends on changing our fundamental nature, we will not survive. This is true not just semantically – because such a
fundamental change would mean we had become a different species of animal – but also pragmatically, because our nature is something that, try as we
might, we will never change. It is possible to change people’s behaviour over time through conditioning, but our fundamental nature is
adamantine. Predators we are, and predators we shall remain, even if we never eat another sausage.
Yes, the human body has emerged from a predatory background. When you agree that a shark is a predator and the human being has emerged also from a
predatory background, you are only doing so so as to justify your carnivorous diet - because you like the taste of meat and want to continue eating
it. You should be aware though of the deeper significance of this whole issue.
An evolutionary history which involved a diet gleaned from predatory activity and carnivorous habits is not simply an issue to justify eating meat,
because "I like it, I want it", and "besides, it is the demand from nature itself, it has nothing to do with my objections or agreements."
There is one basic difference between the human being and other members of the animal kingdom - consciousness, or if you like, at least
'self-consciousness'.
The very existence of vegetarian human beings illustrates this truth. Looking at these individuals from the skeptic's worst point of view, they are
acting against the law of nature. Therefore they have made a conscious choice - evidence of conscious self-reflection.
The same case put forth against vegetarians contravening the laws of nature could be equally put forward against pair bonding homosexuals and the
existence of homosexual societies. But I don't think that the same posters who bravely trot along to every post topic concerning vegetarian diet
would be as gung-ho to criticize homosexuality. But that is another issue.
The deeper significance of the issue of the predatory instincts which are programmed into the human body is the issue of survival of the species
itself. Desmond Morris (and many other thinkers) outlined the dangers and consequences of these instincts in his books 'The Naked Ape' and 'The
Human Zoo' in the 1960s. Many intelligent writers felt obliged to ring the warning bells following the 2 Atomic bombs which were dropped on the
civilian populations of Japan in 1945. In fact, one could say, the entire youth culture from then until now has been psychologically shaped by a
reaction against the threat of global annihilation - every generation from the beatniks to the present iphone generation.
The majority of forums on ATS itself are shaped by the roots of the nuclear holocaust of Japan in 1945, so, as I say it is a much deeper issue than
"look at the shape of our teeth, they are shaped for tearing flesh, I am going to buy a nice juicy steak tonight and guess what? I'm going to eat
it, nom nom nom - in your face you squeamish vegetarian wimps!"
The predatory instinct carries much more than a predisposition to want to eat at McDonalds. Jealousy, possessiveness, ambition, aggression,
competitiveness, acquisitiveness, greed, cunning, deceit, social hierarchies based on levels of aggressiveness, the instincts to create weapons etc
etc. are all part and parcel of this instinct.
When tree-huggers express their disagreement with GMO crops, the same skeptics who say that eating meat is the right thing to do because it is the law
of nature, will argue with them that science is improving upon nature with these crops.
In other words, 'blind biology' is not always right - blind biology can be modified and "improved upon" to create something more in tune with the
demands of survival?
The instinct of the predator can also be improved upon - it can be transformed. This is what Ancient Indian Vedic culture set out to do.
The approach is scientific but the language is poetic - it appeals more towards the intuitive mind.
The metaphor of the lotus arising from the mud is one such example - Buddha himself indicating that compassion itself does not exist in opposition to
greed or self-interest - it is the transformation of greed, or anger or self-interest into compassion. This is what real alchemy is - transforming the
base natural instincts into a higher form.
And this is the challenge set before us on both an individual and societal level or face the inevitable destruction that is the conclusion of
ignorance.
I could go into more detail but if one can't get the point after that, I can't help you.
Well said. 
