Vegetarianism and anthropology

A

A Cup Of Tea

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,313
Reaction score
579
Points
108
radarmark said:
Hey bhaktajan, check out this link, it was written by a UC Berkeley anthropologist (just the kind of person our friend keeps citing). “A hypothesis to explain the role of meat-eating in human evolution” , then look at any 0f the 248 citations (I did not find one in a skimming that rejected the thesis.

Some physical anthropologists (and a lot from our friend's alma mater) seem not to agree with his thesis: "I think all vegetarians need to talk to physical anthropologists who will quickly relieve them of any idea human beings were ever vegetarians." I wrote the author of the article, sure enough, she argues that human beings were primarily herbivorous (like pan paniscus or bongos) who slowly became primarily carnivorous due to ecology changes last ice age (fruits and vegetables slowly disappeared and fresh meat was better--caused less deaths--than carrion).
Click to expand...

Following the reasoning of the theory of evolution, I think humans have been eating different things at different times for different reasons. Adaptation to the environment is the first rule of survival. Yes?
 
I like this. Neither of our closest anthropological relatives (chimp or bonobo) are primarily carnivorous. Why have we been?

It is possible we came down out of the trees and ceased to compete with them (relying on fallen fruit or vegetables). Then the rain forest shrunk meaning we tried to live on other things, but competition on the savannahs with hyenas and lions and buzzards did not work any too well. Then the Ice Age came and really destroyed that food source. Maybe homo sapiens switched to killing and homo neanderthalensis did not. We won, they lost.

Regardless, neither evolution nor anthropology proves that we have always been primarily carnivorous.
 
radarmark said:
Regardless, neither evolution nor anthropology proves that we have always been primarily carnivorous.
Click to expand...

Neither evolution nor anthropology proves that humans have been vegetarians either...

For example, can you name one "ancient" society that didn't eat meat? The closest one I can think of are the Ohlone Indians of California, whose diet was estimated to be 70% acorns. However, they opportunistically supplemented their diet with seafood and wild game, particularly in years of low acorn harvests...
 
I don't know if there was ever a point to prove with this topic, I just wanted to move it out of the way. One point might have been, CAN we live like vegetarians, or SHOULD we live like vegetarians?
 
I understand your concern. We cannot prove that human beings were primarily carnivorous or herbivorous. I believe we can be vegan (as I have been for 35 years, and my wife for about 45). Now should we. Three ways to approach this (1) should we be vegetarians for health concerns, (2) for moral concerns, or (3) for religious concerns.

I do like first one and second one... do not really believe the third.
 
Neither evolution nor anthropology proves that humans have been vegetarians either...
Click to expand...

But it's a fact that Humans are made of the exact same composition as animals.

The problem here is that this topic is being dovetailed with societal norms and especially those mentioned in scripture.

We're relating the Pros & Cons in relation to "Religious Borne Maxims".

It is enough to think:

If I am an ape, I eat ape food;
If I am a cow, I eat cow food;

If I am sheep, I run away from wolves!!!

If I am sheep, I do not stray into the feeding grounds of sheep eaters.

Such a sheep would be very "Karma-Wise" indeed to avoid direct contact.

"anthropology" is about grave digging and guess work ---that is all!

Not even a "Bicycle" has an anthropology discovered!

What famous invention was derived from anthropology?

All society [and it's expert knowledge] has been passed down from predecessors' societies.

Who invented Bread? Who discovered rice?

Fire was discovered by half-ape men?

The wheel was developed by pigmies?

Our Earthly Western History has transpired in just a "Couple of Days of the Devas".

We souls in the material world can enjoy for eternity in every sexual position and savor every digestible life-form in every stratum of living organism ---Life after Life.

Liberation and salvation and enlightenment is just for nerds ---who ponder things beyond the mundane, trite and self-centered temporal passage of life.
 
Bhaktajan, anthropology is a science and since you don't put any faith in science or try to understand scientific principles I don't understand how anyone could argue with you. Your arguments are better suited for the thread on Vegetarianism and the bible that you started.
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
Bhaktajan, anthropology is a science and since you don't put any faith in science or try to understand scientific principles I don't understand how anyone could argue with you. Your arguments are better suited for the thread on Vegetarianism and the bible that you started.
Click to expand...

My immediate re-action was to state:
"anthropology is NOT a science, because it relies on conjecture from start to finish, whereas, the 'scientific Method' may be applied to the application of anthropology; the 'scientific Method' has no use here because No repeatable experiments can be done to ascertain a repeatable conclusion. No "Experiments" have been done to see what an anthropologist surmises. Yet, any anthropologist can read an ancient History Text Book and then proceed to seek out hidden treasures"


---but then I thought, hey you haughty Bhaktajan, where did you (me-myself) get this Idea? How would I know this is true? Up until that moment it was just my earnest conjecture ---so I googled:

Is anthropology a science?

What did I find?

Do you really want me to be the one to tell you?


scientific principles
Click to expand...

Controversies about its history

Anthropologists, like other researchers (especially historians and scientists engaged in field research), have over time assisted state policies and projects, especially colonialism.[69][70]
Some commentators have contended:
That the discipline grew out of colonialism, perhaps was in league with it, and derived some of its key notions from it, consciously or not. (See, for example, Gough, Pels and Salemink, but cf. Lewis 2004).[71]
That ethnographic work was often ahistorical, writing about people as if they were "out of time" in an "ethnographic present" (Johannes Fabian, Time and Its Other).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropology

Anthropologists have been thrown into turmoil about the nature and future of their profession after a decision by the American Anthropological Association at its recent annual meeting to strip the word “science” from a statement of its long-range plan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/science/10anthropology.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

A long-standing debate in anthropological circles has become a recent and white-hot discussion on many science blogs--so hot both the New York Times and Gawker have covered it. Basically, the debate is about whether anthropology--the diverse study of human beings--is a science or a humanity.
http://archaeology.about.com/b/2010/12/15/is-anthropology-a-science-aaafail.htm
Click to expand...
 
So? The question (as I see it) is what anthropology (as a science or a discipline) has to say about vegetarianism. You and I have both stated it neither supports or opposes.

Science, discipline? Does it matter? Math and philosophy are not really sciences. Anthropology is perhaps better seen as a discipline parallel to history. That does not mean it cannot lead to reasonable statements and reasonable approximations to the truth (I would say that is even true of any science whatsoever).

"The problem here is that this topic is being dovetailed with societal norms and especially those mentioned in scripture. We're relating the Pros & Cons in relation to "Religious Borne Maxims"."

Yes, that is why ACOT thought up this thread. If you do not care to participate, don't. This is not any kind of continuation of your Bible and Vegetarianism thread. Rather it (I think) was a way to re-route the pretty simplistic text-book anthropology comments out of that thread, where the topic is only religion (and should be, as you express it).

ACOT, do I grok? Bhaktajan, do you grok?
 
Radarmark groks.
Since he is is a scientist and I am not, I will submit to him on this matter.
 
Yes I GROK it.

We GROK the difference. The Grockenspiel is heard clearly.

I swear I thought I was making an secular appeal when I stated the below illustration of "Laws of the Jungle as lived by its Inhabitants" ---albeit this last post of mine was sprinkled with tangential editorial comments--- so the below is PARSED to re-state the secular (*Homosepien's Ethos) as dovetailed with "Laws of the Jungle" (Homosepiens + Multiple Species).

*'Primates of the family Hominidae, and the only extant species of the genus Homo'. ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

A primate is a mammal of the order Primates which contains prosimians and simians. ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate

Mammals are a clade of warm-blooded amniotes.

A clade or monophylum (see monophyletic) is a group consisting of an ancestor and all its descendants, a single "branch" on the "tree of life". ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clade

A species is a basic unit of biological classification and a taxonomic rank. A species is often defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species

In biological classification, rank is the level (the relative position) in a taxonomic hierarchy. Examples of taxonomic ranks are species, genus, family, and class. ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomic_rank
Click to expand...

bhaktajan said:
But it's a fact that Humans are made of the exact same composition as animals.

It is enough to think:

If I am an ape, I eat ape food;
If I am a cow, I eat cow food;

If I am sheep, I run away from wolves!!!

If I am sheep, I do not stray into the feeding grounds of sheep eaters.

---Such a sheep would be very "Karma-Wise" indeed to avoid direct contact.

Sheep are dumb animals, unlike Human Bi-peds and our innate social planning skills.

All society [and it's expert knowledge] has been passed down from predecessors' societies.

We LIVING CREATURES in this world can enjoy in every sexual position and savor every digestible life-form in every stratum of living organism ---whereever you look.

Liberation and salvation and enlightenment is just for the musings of academic scholars ---who ponder things beyond the mundane, trite and self-centered temporal passage of life in the "Jungle".
Click to expand...

Anthropology 101

Assignment 1

The Jungle​
The Jungle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Jungle is a 1906 novel written by journalist, socialist, and politician Upton Sinclair (1878-1968).

Sinclair wrote the novel with the intent to portray the lives of immigrants in the United States.

However, readers were more concerned with the large portion of the book pertaining to the bad practices and corruption of the American meatpacking industry during the early 20th century, and the book is now often interpreted and taught as a journalist's account of the poor working conditions in the industry.

The novel depicts, in harsh tones, poverty, the absence of social programs, unpleasant living and working conditions, and the hopelessness prevalent among the working class, which is contrasted with the deeply-rooted corruption on the part of those in power.
Click to expand...
 
Food, Inc. and King Corn are my favorite movies on this subject.
 
IowaGuy said:
Food, Inc. and King Corn are my favorite movies on this subject.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Off the top of my head, "FAST FOOD NATION" ---IMO the movie version was too subtle for the Gen Population to get the significance. [the book was much more scathing].

I do have some documentaries too ---can't remember the names now.

::::::::::::::::::::
There always the [little mentioned] American Oprah Winfrey Court case against the cattle industry too.
 
Karma occurs after the fact after the incubation period ---or when expeditiously available for processing.

Seems the "material World" is NOT about the court intrigues Pop-Idols ---but rather as place where the "Material Elements" are free to expeditiously process intramural movements.

The history of the world is Karma & Karmic reactions among inert shapes & elemental subtances. After all, "E=MC2" doesn't involve "the Human Condition".

Human Conditions come and go ---but solid objects can be sold at antique Road Shows!

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
There is a Maxim from the Bhagavad-gita:
BG 3.21: Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues.

in strict contra-distinction to bad-karma mongering done by un-witting persons that have previously garnered Good Karma for themselves ... but later ... take two steps backwards from acquiring additional future Auspicious Good Karma:

Bo, the Portuguese water dog that lives with Obama family in the White House, has enjoyed a first birthday befitting of America's first canine with a specially-produced cake made out of veal.
Click to expand...
It is not a dog's life for America's first canine - Telegraph

***********************************
Cafe Milano in Georgetown Washington DC USA. Cafe Milano
3251 Prospect St. NW
Cafe Milano, Italian Restaurant in Washington, DC

For her 49th birthday on Jan. 17 2013,
the first lady, Michelle Obama,
had a special menu of,
among other Italian dishes,
fusilli with veal ragu,
roasted tile fish with fennel and thyme puree and
ricotta cheese mousse with carmelized pear.

Where the Obamas have eaten — and where they should eat - The Washington Post

The Water Bowl: Bo's Veal Birthday Cake! Plus, Are Pets Bad for the Environment? - Pet News : People.com

***********************************
vs.

Sarah Brown refused to eat veal and foie gras at Nato summit banquet | Mail Online

Foie gras was also served to Carla Bruni-Sarkozy and
Michelle Obama during their lunch last Friday,
indicating that Mrs Brown stands alone
among world leaders' wives in her opinions on animal welfare.
Both foods feature strongly in traditional French cuisine,
and are a favourite of chefs including Gordon Ramsay
and Marco Pierre White.
Foie gras is made from the liver of a goose or duck
that has been especially fattened, typically through force-feeding.
The delicacy of the Perigord region of France
has attracted worldwide
due to the force-feeding process, and
production has even been banned in some countries,
including Turkey and Israel.
Veal attracts criticism for methods
used to rear the young calves,
such as the 'growing stall',
a form of housing which limits the animals'
muscle development for more tender meat,
that has been banned in the UK.
Animal rights campaigners continue to protest against
practices relating to weaning, transportation, social grouping,
feeding methods and nutrition.
 
IMO it seems we are keeping the "Yamadutas" busy.

A wild speculation (actually this is a optimistic idea) of mine is that those that wildly kill themselves are future yamadutas playing around in mortal guise ---like dolphins or whales or seal jumping out of the water into the air; or Birds diving into the sea water tp hunt prey.

But I am thinking that Yamadutas working off the clock want to play around and kill them selves ---since it's their own job to transport souls to hell--- there must be a back log right now, and in future more Yamadutas will be employed around the clock.

But I still wonder why only the most sinfull are escorted to Dharma-Raja ---whikle the meek and innocent and mediocre are auto-processed toward the next cyle of births in samsara.

Here is a discussion with vedic citations included about the subject of what happens to the soul after death:

Life between lives.

Furthermore, anyone also who in his life but by false pride proved himself degraded before a more honorable one of good birth, austerity, knowledge, good behavior and loyalty to the principles, not showing much of respect, is a dead man alive who after dying head down is thrown into the hell of Ksarakardama [the 'pool of acrid mud'] to suffer indeed the most painful conditions.
Srimad Bhagavatam: Canto 5 - Chapter 26

The Hellish Worlds or the Karmic Rebound
Click to expand...

UPDATE:

LiveLeak.com - Egypt's al-Azhar University Issues Book Teaching Kids the Killing of Sinners & Cannibalism

Is this a dis-information Hoax?

Is the following story true?

an over-clocked monkey,
Bhaktajan

I apollogise if this is bogus dis-information.

I pray it is dis-information ---and if so, that it be revealed as False ASAP.
 
bhaktajan said:
But I still wonder why only the most sinfull are escorted to Dharma-Raja ---whikle the meek and innocent and mediocre are auto-processed toward the next cyle of births in samsara.

Here is a discussion with vedic citations included about the subject of what happens to the soul after death: Life between lives.
Click to expand...
Well, Bhaktajan, all mortal souls are transported to Dharmaraja. The sinful are dragged by hair, the innocents are transported with honor. For the pious, they send chartered planes (Vimanas). The reason is that all balance-sheets are kept by the able accountant Chitragupta in Dharmaraja's office.

You have quoted from SrimadBhagawatam. That is not a "Vedic citation". :D
 
radarmark said:
I like this. Neither of our closest anthropological relatives (chimp or bonobo) are primarily carnivorous. Why have we been?

It is possible we came down out of the trees and ceased to compete with them (relying on fallen fruit or vegetables). Then the rain forest shrunk meaning we tried to live on other things, but competition on the savannahs with hyenas and lions and buzzards did not work any too well. Then the Ice Age came and really destroyed that food source. Maybe homo sapiens switched to killing and homo neanderthalensis did not. We won, they lost.

Regardless, neither evolution nor anthropology proves that we have always been primarily carnivorous.
Click to expand...
Yet, the evolutionary irony that keeps slapping me in the face is how chimps and bonobos have such massive canine teeth...almost like a carnivorous predator...and we have such tiny canine teeth. It doesn't make evolutionary sense!

The problem I see with reverting to "eating meat" in an ice age due to lack of vegetation is that the meat one is eating had to eat something too...so if there is meat to eat, there is likely vegetation to eat as well...the "ice age" becomes a red herring argument. No veggies, no flesh.

According to some stuff I came across recently, Neandertals were primarily meat eaters...and were successful at it for 200K years across Europe. "Primarily" meaning on the order of 98%...not fish, not veggies...they ate meat and lots of it. Cro Magnon (us) on the other hand, proved to be opportunistic eaters. We ate veggies if that is what was available, we ate meat if that is what was available, and we ate fish if that was what was available. One big difference between us and Neandertal appears to be that we learned to adapt, and developed technologies to adapt...where the Neandertals had a "basic toolkit" that allowed them to kill their big game and that was all they knew or wanted to know. They didn't fish and they didn't adapt to other resources, they specialized only in gathering meat.

On a surface level it can seem trivial, but in order to be able to adjust and adapt technologies to changing situations (like hunting, fishing and picking veggies on an ad hoc basis) apparently helped trigger certain areas of the brain that furthered its development. It's hard to draw it all together, but it seems that this tendency towards adaptive technology promoted things like language because of necessity.

And then there are things like painted cave walls and stringed beads worn as ornaments... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top