Hacker News Reader

Comment by dotancohen | Hacker News Reader

Nature is rough my friend. Dogs and bears (which are closely related to dogs) have emotion and form bonds, but they ruthlessly prey one on the other. You and I might live a comfortable life now, but without society you would put any sentient being on the plate in order to feed your own sentient offspring.

Just as you believe that animals are no different from man, you should realize that man is no different from animals and that our physiology requires us to eat them just as they must eat each other. Of course with modern nutritional knowledge and preparation techniques you _could_ live off flora, but human physiology in the absence of technology requires meat no matter how cute or emotional the prey.

View on HN

And if we went back to living in caves, I'd take up eating animals again. I used to hunt, and I have no particular qualms in taking it up again if it was necessary, which is more than I could say for a lot of people. I always found it incredibly hypocritical when non-vegetarians used to criticise me for hunting.

We are perfectly capable of eating a plant-based diet, we can derive any missing vitamins (e.g. B12) from supplements and fortified foods. Most of us have the choice to forgo eating animals.

I don't see the relevance. We do live in society and do have technology. Without those things, we wouldn't have hospitals, cardboard, or Hacker News either, but what does that mean?

There's a sort of meme which is like a lecture on how dangerous the world 'really' is, often to justify or advocate a lack of compassion. It's portrayed as 'realism' but I find it surreal: We don't live in a state of nature and we have no desire to. Why are we talking about it? Why don't we aim for more, as our ancestors who built this society did?

> There's a sort of meme which is like a lecture on how dangerous the world 'really' is, often to justify or advocate a lack of compassion.

But on the other hand, compassion is not an absolute value either. Taken to extremes, it fosters individual weakness, hypersensitivity, emotionality. And, on a social level, degeneracy of all sorts - crime, mental disease, etc.

That's why ancient societies took pains to train their young men in the arts of war, long after it had ceased to be objectively necessary. The predatory instincts have a great deal of character-building value.

> Taken to extremes, it fosters individual weakness, hypersensitivity, emotionality. And, on a social level, degeneracy of all sorts - crime, mental disease, etc.

I disagree. What is that based on? Compassion fosters crime? The experts I know, and my experience in the world, say compassion fosters emotional strength, reduces behavioral problems, and increases resilience.

> That's why ancient societies took pains to train their young men in the arts of war, long after it had ceased to be objectively necessary. The predatory instincts have a great deal of character-building value.

Again, is there any basis for this? It's bizarre. Even if it's true of "ancient societies" (what time period? which ones?), I have no desire to live in one - and neither would you. We've moved far beyond their bizarre, archaic beliefs and practices. Should we return to human sacrifice, illiteracy, and constant war too?

I'm guessing that fostering "predatory instincts" fosters crime, mental disease, not to mention war and violence.

> our physiology requires us to eat them just as they must eat each other.

This not true as you pointed out yourself.

Not human physiology but a certain environment requires humans to eat meat because there is nothing better available.

In all societies except the most retarded, a vegan diet with supplements (notably vitamin B12) is the cheapest and healthiest diet.

https://www.eatright.org/food/nutrition/vegetarian-and-speci...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com