Because it's a belief extrapolated from personal experience, which is all any of us have to go on for anything really.
No - but I'm sure the majority of people think what they're doing is right most of the time (even if they later find it wasn't!).
Vegetarian?
- Thread starter lechweoryx
- Start date
Because it's a belief extrapolated from personal experience, which is all any of us have to go on for anything really.
No - but I'm sure the majority of people think what they're doing is right most of the time (even if they later find it wasn't!).
Oh dear, and I thought you were some sort of scientist!
Please see post 48.
But this is isn't a scientific question! And in any case - if I believe that genetic information is passed from parent to offpsring via a sequence of amino acids contained within a double helix of deoxyribonucleic acid within the chromosomes of a cell nucleus this is also a belief from personal experience - the experience of being told so by a lot of people and organisations whose opinion I trust. All of science is based on what people somewhere have personally experienced and it becomes accepted if other people trust the data.
Less philosophically, it's very difficult to apply 'hard' scientific principles of study to sociology becuase you have an awkward factor known as humans! To really know what the average vegetarian thinks would require a massive and carefully-worded survey-based study and to be honest I don't have time to run one of those in between posts
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
Well, that was until you met us ZooChat vegetarians! Now you have new data
This data is of course being added to my existing data set for future extrapolations! The bigger the sample size, the more reliable the conclusions.
I know it isn’t a scientific question, I was just disagreeing with your statement that all we can go on is what we have personally experienced. It is simply not true to say that reading learned texts and peer-reviewed articles, going to lectures, and listening to the wisdom of others counts as personal experience, unless you have carried out all the work and seen it for yourself. It’s not just semantics, it’s the actual definition of "personal experience". What I’m trying to say is that I agree with zooplantman and the extrapolation of one’s own necessarily limited experience is not valid.
Last edited:
So how can anyone discuss anything they have not personally experienced? You make conclusions based on what you know about it from other sources and what you have experienced. Whether in science or webboards. This is what I did in my first statement, which lead me to be accused of being unscienfitic. My initial use of 'personal experience' referred specifically to my personal experience - as in 'what I have experienced' - which I would say includes books I have read.
I agree that personal experience is not the same as acquired knowledge, but I would count any information regarding vegetarianism (from whatever source) as part of my personal experience of vegetarianism for debating purposes.
We're now debating the philosophy of the reasoning behind the formation of my opinion - I think this an unnecessary level of scrutiny for a simple opinion!
Last edited:
I am suprised at the response to suggesting most vegetarians want more people to be vegetarian. While I agree most are not militant or missionary about it, I'm sure most would prefer more people to avoid meat.
Do people honestly think most vegetarians wouldn't prefer this given the chance? This would surprise me.
Do people honestly think most vegetarians wouldn't prefer this given the chance? This would surprise me.
I'm not referring to you or Johnny being brutal, I'm referring to the method.
As for the rest, no comment, as it might end up being deleted.
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
Speaking for myself, I don't have a lot of confidence in any statement that refers to "most vegetarians" or "most Zoo visitors" or "most Christians," etc.
If you want to know what most vegetarians believe, you'll have to define what a vegetarian is and then go out and ask them. And does a 40 year vegetarian count the same as a three week vegetarian? What about people who were vegetarians for two years, seven years ago?
Even if "most" whoever believed whatever, what of it? What does it matter if 51% of a group (however defined) or 63.6% believe in a certain way. What have we learned from it?
I do understand that this sort of generalization is popular, but I don't see its usefulness.
I am not trying to be contrary here, I am taking a stand against simplistic generalizations that might be substituted as useful knowledge. I believe it is more honest to recognize that people are rather diverse and we have little idea what they are thinking or desiring. Personally, I think the fun is in getting to know one by one.
I take your point, but sayign that 'most X believe Y' isn't a generalisation to my mind (I'm not saying 'all of X beileve Y', just 'most', which in my experience is true. I'm inviting to be contradicted if people have evidence to the contrary!).
I am getting the feeling people just don't want to discuss this angle for some reason so are picking on how I came to the conclusion. Never mind - this is just something I've found to be the case, is all.
Bovid for me. With fermented bovid milk and some smoked suid on top, if possible!
EDIT: And maybe some phasianid nuggets.
[HOMER] Mmm... phasianids... [/HOMER]
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
Tragically, we vegetarians will never experience the heady thrill of the Final Krusty Ribwich Tour
Sun Wukong
Well-Known Member
And what am I supposed to see there - other than me not responding to redpanda's squabble attempt?
@Zooplantman: At least you can get Krusty's "Mother Nature Burger"-although I'd prefer the Ribwich in regard to the social and digestive consequences.
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
@Zooplantman: At least you can get Krusty's "Mother Nature Burger"-although I'd prefer the Ribwich in regard to the social and digestive consequences.
Oh I remember!
My opinion: that if we want to joke with people then there are things we say in person that don't work the same on the internet.
But if we want to antagonize someone, we know how that is done as well.
Post 48 was unnecessarily rude and provocative and I expect you know it. It doesn't matter whether redpanda did it too.
Yes it is a generalisation and indeed it is prejudice. You have your own notion of what a large group is like based upon your own small experience.
A scientist does not simply put out an unsubstantiated hypothesis and declare it to be true until contradicted, he/she produces at least some convincing supportive evidence.
You are confusing knowledge with experience. If I read about the experiences of an eminent scientist (or anything else for that matter) whom I trust then my knowledge has increased, but his personal experiences do not become mine.
To get back to one of your earlier points: I certainly don't feel that captive carnivorous animals should be deprived of meat, but then I am not a vegetarian.
@sun wukong: an unkind person might suggest that you resemble a caveman both in your diet and your attitude to women. I don't know you so I won't.
Paix
Well-Known Member
I am shaking my head in disbelief because this is exactly what this has turned into, a school yard tussle. None of my friends, all be it alot of them non-vegetarian seem interested in my diet, they do not try and force meat upon me, they also do not try and tell me how their diet is much healthier!
Paix
Well-Known Member
Thanks, but believe me, I am not always mature.
Can we just talk about Asterix? Far less controversial.
I get the feeling a few people take this a little seriously!
It all comes down to personal preference but for me the only pro-vegetarian argument that holds any water is the carbon-efficiency one advocated by redpanda above. And I'm of the view that one can make personal carbon cutbacks in other areas if one wishes. I want meat. As Sun points out, it's a natural part of our diet. The fact that Paix (who otherwise seems to have a very well balanced diet, given the absence of one of the human diet's major components) feels the need to take B12 supplements is the giveaway that the diet is not properly balanced. A balanced diet doesn't require artifical supplements.
I have no problems with eating any animal - with just three caveats:
1) They should be reared and despatched as humanely as possible (while I am pro-meat, I am anti hunting with hounds, for example)
2) They should not be from endangered species (although I am very happy to eat rare domestic breeds, as eating them encourages their commercial breeding and actually increases their security!)
3) They should not be humans! (Chlidonias' societal convention kicks in!)
I completely agree with this whole post, and I think this is the most valuable thing that has been posted on this thread! But one of the main reasons why I dont eat animals is mainly because I dont like the taste and I dont really like the fact that an animal has been killed just to feed me for one. No matter what the circle of life is.
I am not going to force my views onto anyone, and even I, am closely torn on whether to stay vegetarian or not, like I said before, it is mainly because of those two reasons.
