From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 07:02:01 MDT
Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> There is a 3rd "rational" argument [for vegetarianism].
> Animal food sources are simply inefficient!
> (Perhaps you include this in "scientific").
If you mean animal foods are more expensive then I won't disagree. People
have a right to save money at the expense of their health, but that is not
optimizing the diet.
I notice that time and time again here on the extropian list that I have a
greater appreciation for the theory of evolution than many others.
I believe we are as perfectly adapted to a paleo diet as a giraffe is
perfectly adapted to eating the leaves from tall trees. In these threads,
however, few people are willing to grant that 4,000,000 years of hominid
evolution has optimized the human genome for a prehistoric diet.
I recall similar objections in the thread about DNA and personality. I was
arguing that our DNA is integral to our personalities, while many others
were arguing otherwise.
There seems to be a general tendency among extropians to think that natural
selection is not efficient even over millions of years -- that our genome is
our enemy in need of being overcome by our powerful intellects, rather than
our friend in need of being seen as a partner in our development. I see a
tendency here to distrust nature in favor of the intellect, and yet it was
nature that gave us that intellect.
Our intellects have very limited knowledge of proper diet. Many questions
remain unanswered. Nutritionists themselves cannot agree on proper diet.
They argue on television and at national health conferences. There is
however no way to argue with millions of years of evolution.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 07:11:18 MDT