Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Altair
Just what in the world are you trying to communicate Debrah?
We're homo sapiens, not any of the other species. Our ancestors evolved as meat eaters.
I don't need to do any challenge without tools, and neither does a vegan. The meaning behind the 'challenge' was to make you think about the wilderness and how humans survive. We make tools, weapons, fire. We hunt and we cook. We do not have to do it like lions, which is the fallacy that vegans always bring forth. We evolved to catch and kill prey. If you argue against it because we need tools and weapons than you can't farm either and that means no more vegan diet for you. Without civilization you can try and live like (or with) the gorillas but you'll make a poor gorilla.
|
The 'natural fallacy argument' holds no water except to say prehistoric or pre-agricultural humans ate what was available to them within their respective environments, and even that fluctuated with the seasons. We can be quite sure of a few general things, though. For example, protein and especially fat, would be a highly valued nutrients, and unfortunate animals would be good sources of these. However, I don't think hunting, fishing or foraging for insects and grubs for survival is morally equivalent to the mass supply of animal products in modernity, so veganism became ethically relevant in recent times, whereas in pre-agricultural antiquity, killing to eat was simply a necessary aspect of life. However, it is likely that a more fundamental morality concerning ecologically sustainability was endemic to the beliefs of prehistoric humans just about everywhere, and because so few people were alive, the world might have seemed inexhaustibly abundant.