Machinesworking wrote:stringtapper wrote:You believe that animal slaughter for the purposes of food harvesting is killing "for no reason?" Clearly there is a reason or it wouldn't be happening at all.
Not at all, I'm saying that raising animals in metal boxes in cages slightly larger than the actual animal, or raising them so tightly packed they have to be fed mass amounts of antibiotics to not die in the hundreds, yeah that's unnatural, and making the comparison to nature to alleviate the ridiculous conditions factory farming is done in, is silly at best. <--- but right here, you're comeback and my reply becomes just semantic arguing with no resolution. You are OK with factory farming conditions, I think it's unnecessary and selfish on mankinds part. That, is the truth, otherwise what are we talking about? I do enjoy your posts though, not at all about that. What are our parameters here? This is a HUGE subject to say the least.
I have always had a problem with the conventional definition of the word "natural." If humans are doing it, then there is obviously something "natural" about it. That is to say that it is part of human nature to have developed to the point of taking such actions simply because... well, we did. I'm not speaking of what could have happened, and not what should happen, but what did happen. And history tells us that it was in some part of human nature to devise these methods of food harvesting.
Well in many ways our ability to refine and serve food low in fiber and high in fat, sugar, and salt is a great way to get rid of the elderly even though we have advanced medicine tremendously in the last 200 years. That is 'natural', but for the sake of clarity what I mean by natural is simply that it's part of a cycle of life that brings health and strength to the person and the planet etc. In your own terms nuclear power in not unnatural, so we have to define what is a state close to the best plan of action for healthy living with a different term according to your principals.
Let's say evolutionarily beneficial? I do not believe that factory farming conditions, and the meat produced are of a quality that advances mankind in a positive direction evolutionarily, both in the psychological and physical realm. Mentally you accept that some of the food you eat will have lived in horrible conditions, in abject misery. This to me is not a psychologically beneficial state. I'm not convinced that animals took out of their natural state, (no arguments there I hope, living life in a box or pen in heavily crowded conditions fed a diet specifically designed with weight gain in mind and not survival in the wild, is not a natural state for that animal etc.) are as capable of giving anything akin to real sustenance.
Raw natural food people VS Meat and potatoes types, well physically in almost every case, eventually the meat and potatoes types end up at 35 or so pudgy and overweight, with health problems. Most of the natural food people I know who haven't succumbed to an addictive substance that negates the benefits are extremely healthy compared.
In the end though it's hard to deny that mankind has a self destruct urge, and loves living in denial, so it's entirely possible that it's 'natural' for us to do things that aren't really that humane or beneficial to us. That we will continue to ignore all signs of our own impending overpopulation and lowered quality of air, water and food, until we destroy ourselves. It's oddly comforting to know that some animals will survive whatever deadly dramatic travesty we perpetuate.
I used to think differently about this, mankind should be the #1 concern of any human, natural to be etc. but..
(all other) Animals > People - no exceptions.
