Science, frugivores, conclusions, and details.

[Guest guest]

Hi Richard,

 

I'm glad you liked my post.

 

To prevent oneself from seeing the obvious, all one has to do is get

bogged down and lost in the details of microscopic analysis, such as

the Beyond Veg site does. The person who studies trees with only a

microscope won't be able discover that a tree is part of a forest.

They'll surely know a lot, but it will be a lot of knowledge about

nothing significant. Some larger observations are required for

understanding humanity's place in worldly life.

 

We cannot use the modern civilized human's diet as a guide to

determine what we and our species need to be eating, and what they

naturally eat. Different observations and analysis are required.

 

Humans have domesticated themselves very recently in

history/evolution. This occurred mostly within the last 100,000

years, and especially in the last 20,000 years. Evolution happens on

a time scale of millions of years, so there's not enough time for our

digestive systems and other anatomy to change to accomdate the

exceedinly rapid dietary changes.

 

Because humans are following very unevolved habits regarding their

recent diet changes, we see our bodies breaking down constantly

(experienced as dis-ease) as we eat our civilized diets. Disease is

evidence of our self-harming practices.

 

Civilized humans still have their natural senses, but these senses

are hidden in a confused, coming-from-all-directions attack by

errorful, self-harming behavioural habits that precipitate odd bodily

feelings and sensations misinterpreted by a brain intellecutally mis-

programmed since birth.

 

For example, most people think hunger pangs are a sign of their

hunger. In reality, the hunger pains are pain and discomfort signals

put out by an abused stomach and digestive organs in the abdomen.

When the pain reveals itself, as the so-called 'hunger-pangs', a

person needs to not eat, just as a person needs to not use their foot

after spraining it and feeling piercing pain, or not rubbing

substances on their skin after it is cut and is tender and painful.

 

As part of the numerous studies that are used to determine the human

species' natural diet is an observation of their still-existant-

though-abused natural senses and anatomical features:

 

Dexterous hands/fingers suited for

picking/holding/supporting/manipulating small items.

Rounded finger nails ideal for fruit eating/peeling, extremely poor

for meat eating, unnecessary for other foods.

Long, agile limbs suited for tree climbing.

 

 

Digestive structure and function ideal for fruit digestion.

Teeth perfect for fruit mastication.

Easily swallow liquids, difficulty swallowing large chunks/drier

foods, unlike carnivores and herbivores.

Prefers easily masticated foods that are juicy (not hard or tough-to-

chew foods).

 

Attraction to sweetness, vibrant colours, succulent foods.

Attraction to in green plant/tree environments.

 

Weak digestive abilities consistent with predigested nature of fruit.

Long digestive systems for longer absorption to compliment weak

digestive juices.

 

No natural drinking apparatus - must depend mostly on water from its

food. Fruit's high water content is suited for this.

 

Dreams of life of ease in tropics, surrounded by fruit, greenery,

beaches, warmth, water, etc. (ask a child, and the

retirees/vacationers in Florida/Hawaii/Southern US/ and other

warm/tropical climate hotspots).

 

Doesn't dream of living in wide open grasslands (gazelles, lions),

cold mountain ranges (furry animals), caves (bats), lakes (fish),

desserts (camels), snowfields (polar bears), underground bunkers

(moles, worms), mid-air (birds), cold (penguins), blazing hot

(lizard), crevices (insects), and huge bodies of water (whales).

 

Dreaming/day-dreaming are psychological behaviours which give us

general impressions of our true selves. Dreaming of tropical

environments is a subconscious pull that is psyche rooted in the

human species' evolution in the tropics. One can bet that other

creatures have the same dreamy pulls for their natural environments,

or niches in nature.

 

Endless more traits of the human species can be observed, and they

all speak huge volumes about our frugivorous and non-carnivorous,

non-herbivorous, non-insectivorous, non-graminovorous nature.

 

After realizing the above, comparison can be made to the other

frugivorous species that live in the tropics, regarding anantomy,

physiology, and psychology. We share the same traits as these other

frugivores (mostly primates). There's a massive difference between us

and natural herbivores (eat mostly plants, like horses), carnivores

(eat mostly animals, like lions), insectivores (eat mostly bugs, like

birds), and graminovores (eat mostly grass seeds and nuts like birds,

small rodents).

 

.......................

 

To believe is to accept without evidence and to say one believes

something is to admit ignorance. Your words about beliefs, in your

post, are making a claim that nothing can be known, that our

thoughts are only beliefs.

 

I am a long time raw fooder, and I have great experience in

overcoming bad habits, and helping/seeing others overcome theirs.

There's no belief required when I see a person take 10 years to stop

eating bread, after trying for ten years to stop eating bread. From

personal experience with getting over bread addiction and my seeing

with my own eyes what the other person did during the ten years, I

know what the person had to go through to get over their addiction -

alot of physical, emotional, and mental strife. I know what happened.

I saw it in them and felt it in myself when I went through it.

 

Just because everyone has beliefs doesn't mean they have to have

them, or that belief is normal to have, or that beliefs are necessary.

 

What is necessary is to know things. Things can be known. I turn on

the tap because I know water will come out. I eat food because I

know I need to eat for nourishment. I turn the steering wheel of my

car because I know it will make the car turn the corner. I write this

post with a computer keyboard because I know how to type.

 

Things can be known, and sensible conclusions and pursuits result

after things are known. That is why I pursue the known, not beliefs.

 

Beliefs are for making up for lack of knowledge where one needs to

have knowledge but can't get it. Speculation can be used to inspire a

search for the truth. Belief is the lazyboy fall-back or innocent

misstep when truth is not looked for or found, but needed.

 

An simple and easy way to discredit those who have the skill and put

in the necessary time and effort to discover the truth, is to make

claim that everything is a belief, and nothing can be known. By doing

that, those who are unable to find truth/ are lazy/are in fear of

being shown wrong/are unclear minded/are habituated to believe can

suddenly appear equal to those who, using skills, did put in the

effort and time that was required.

 

I realize you are putting in time and effort, and that can continue

into distinguishing the difference between truth and belief, and the

practicing of careful research techniques while being every mindful

of intellectual pitfalls (such as claiming all is to be believed and

nothing can be known, getting lost in details, looking for proofs

when knowledge is enough, using circular logic, getting caught up in

fallacies, and other trips on the stairs).

 

Thanks for your reply and thoughts, Robert

[Guest guest]

" Robert Rust " <rustrobert wrote:

 

> Dreams of life of ease in tropics, surrounded by fruit, greenery,

> beaches, warmth, water, etc. (ask a child, and the

> retirees/vacationers in Florida/Hawaii/Southern US/ and other

> warm/tropical climate hotspots).

>

> Doesn't dream of living in wide open grasslands (gazelles, lions),

> cold mountain ranges (furry animals), caves (bats), lakes (fish),

> desserts (camels), snowfields (polar bears), underground bunkers

> (moles, worms), mid-air (birds), cold (penguins), blazing hot

> (lizard), crevices (insects), and huge bodies of water (whales).

 

Actually, I hate tropical environments and I never dream about them. I live in a

cool rainy climate by choice and I love the winter, snow, fog. This has been the

way I have always been, regardless of lifestyle or diet.

 

> ......................

>

> To believe is to accept without evidence and to say one believes

> something is to admit ignorance. Your words about beliefs, in your

> post, are making a claim that nothing can be known, that our

> thoughts are only beliefs.

>

> I am a long time raw fooder, and I have great experience in

> overcoming bad habits, and helping/seeing others overcome theirs.

> There's no belief required when I see a person take 10 years to stop

> eating bread, after trying for ten years to stop eating bread. From

> personal experience with getting over bread addiction and my seeing

> with my own eyes what the other person did during the ten years, I

> know what the person had to go through to get over their addiction -

> alot of physical, emotional, and mental strife. I know what happened.

> I saw it in them and felt it in myself when I went through it.

 

That is fine and applies in these 2 instances. In your previous post, you

generalized these 2 specifics in such a way as to imply to me a generalized

belief rather than a documented fact applicable to everyone (or most folks).

Perhaps a different belief would result in a different outcome, making the

transition easier.

 

The map is not the territory. If you believe that your mind does not filter

reality to fit your beliefs, that is fine, but I don't believe it. I've never

met the totally objective man (not sure I'd want to).

 

>

> Just because everyone has beliefs doesn't mean they have to have

> them, or that belief is normal to have, or that beliefs are necessary.

 

Since everyone has them they are, by definition, " normal " , and it might be a

good idea to take them into account. They can be immensely powerful in changing

personal reality. Indeed, they create personal reality.

 

>

> What is necessary is to know things. Things can be known. I turn on

> the tap because I know water will come out. I eat food because I

> know I need to eat for nourishment. I turn the steering wheel of my

> car because I know it will make the car turn the corner. I write this

> post with a computer keyboard because I know how to type.

>

> Things can be known, and sensible conclusions and pursuits result

> after things are known. That is why I pursue the known, not beliefs.

 

That sounds like a strong version of belief. I could provide instances where

none of the above are true. It is reasonable to believe that all of the above

will happen, and probable, but not certain.

 

>

> Beliefs are for making up for lack of knowledge where one needs to

> have knowledge but can't get it. Speculation can be used to inspire a

> search for the truth. Belief is the lazyboy fall-back or innocent

> misstep when truth is not looked for or found, but needed.

>

> An simple and easy way to discredit those who have the skill and put

> in the necessary time and effort to discover the truth, is to make

> claim that everything is a belief, and nothing can be known. By doing

> that, those who are unable to find truth/ are lazy/are in fear of

> being shown wrong/are unclear minded/are habituated to believe can

> suddenly appear equal to those who, using skills, did put in the

> efforand time that was required.

 

The only problem is that for most facts or truths you come up with, someone else

with a different belief system can find a differing set of facts or truths that

support their beliefs and experiences as well as yours support you. And your

presentation of your facts and truths to them aren't likely to change their

belief system, especially if they believe that they are dealing only in facts or

truths. Now you can attempt to discredit their truths to make a point (call them

unscientific or what have you), but that may or may not have any effect on them.

I've worked professionally as a scientist for 15 years (and studied philosophy

almost as long), but I would suspect that we have greatly differeing beliefs

about what " is " and " isn't " science, not to mention belief, truth and reality.

 

>

> I realize you are putting in time and effort, and that can continue

> into distinguishing the difference between truth and belief, and the

> practicing of careful research techniques while being every mindful

> of intellectual pitfalls (such as claiming all is to be believed and

> nothing can be known, getting lost in details, looking for proofs

> when knowledge is enough, using circular logic, getting caught up in

> fallacies, and other trips on the stairs).

 

I'll ignore the condescending tone as my imagination It's been enjoyable,

but I've discovered that lenghthy 'net discussions tend, for me anyway, to get

far afield from what most folk in the group want to read about. I suspect that

the nature of belief, etc might be stretching things a bit! Besides, I like to

keep it short and sweet so I can have another life!

 

Richard