Guest guest Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 The easy part: There is an alternative to gelatin(e) - VegCaps. They can be ordered online, and many herbal supplements come in them now. Even if you decide you need supplemental fish oil, no reason to have to be part of the harm to our large brain ruminant friends if something like VegCaps will work. The hard part: I think we need alternative definitions of vegetarianism and veganism that will help advance the movement quicker and bring forth all the beneficial changes that will occur when more and more people adopt a more plant-based diet. When vegetarians and vegans seem to nitpick over things like fish oil, it appears to me that we scare people off who would otherwise seek our support in their moves towards a more plant-based diet. I think mathematically 10 people becoming vegan or vegetarian except for the consumption of fish for fish oil is a farther advance of veganism or vegetarianism than 5 people becoming more strictly vegan or vegetarian. Part of the problem is we're products of our culture, which has emphasized two value logic for thousands of years. If you're not pure, then you're sinful and going to hell. Way back in Jesus' day, the priests of the Temple would nitpick on minor breadcrumb sins and require so many animals be brought to sacrifice. This became a corrupt system, with the priests getting kickbacks from the animal sellers right there in the Temple. Jesus' rebellion against this corruption, including chasing the sellers of animals from the Temple, feeding the masses fruit and bread, and calling for compassion by quoting Hosea 6:6, " I desire mercy, not the killing of animals " - this rebellion led the priests to conspire to have him killed. Despite all that Jesus did to oppose nitpicking and the killing of animals, and to promote vegetarianism, the Christian church adopted the nitpicking of the priests of the Temple and, under Constantine especially, violently persecuted the vegetarians, so deeply ingrained was the two value logic way of thinking even then. This historical example shows another way that such a way of thinking works against the advance of vegetarianism and veganism. Two value logic is part of Aristotle's system of logic, but even he had doubts about whether two value logic was valid for more than a small fraction of reality. There are multi-value logical systems, including " fuzzy logic " in which there is an infinitesimally shaded gray scale between absolute yes and absolute no. An example of a situation which defies two value logic, yet is describable by fuzzy logic: First a try at description and deduction with two value logic: One grain of sand is not a heap. Two grains of sand are a heap. And so on. The logical conclusion is that so many billions of grains of sand are not a heap, yet if you look at it, it is clearly something of a heap. If you start with that as a heap, take away one grain of sand, is it still a heap? Clearly yes. Take away another, and it's still a heap. Again and again, it is still a heap again and again. Down to ten grains of sand? Oops, where did it stop being a heap? Now the situation in fuzzy logic terms: Zero grains of sand is absolutely not a heap. One grain of sand is the beginning of a heap, and two are getting closer to a heap. 100 grains of sand is about .001% of a heap, and a million grains of sand are about 3% a heap, 93% not a heap. Perhaps our concept of a " heap " is idealistic and there is no absolute heap, but our so many billions of grains of sand are 99% a heap and just 1% short of matching our idealic heap. The hard truth is that our concept of veganism is idealistic. There is no way yet on earth to be 100% vegan. I'm eating mung bean threads with arame and pepitas. Both the seed foods require displacement of habitat, tilling of soil despite the animal life in it, and fertilizing of the flowers by bees. Agriculture can be veganic with growers becoming very intimate with the land and processes that produce food, but can it ever be 100% vegan? It's clear to me that it cannot. I cannot be 100% vegan. I am about 99% vegan, and I believe that veganism is the answer to so many problems in our world. Veganism is a valid concept, just as democracy is a valid concept, but both terms are idealistic and I'm afraid that both terms have been used in ways that abuse other people and advance the opposite of what they're about. I remember when Jean Kirkpatrick, the US ambassador to the UN under the Ronald Wilson Reagan (6-6-6 letters), tried to claim that the authoritarian governments that the US supported in Latin America, death squads and all, were more democratic than the " totalitarian " governments of the Soviet block. That clearly absurd way of thinking let thousands of people get tortured, raped, assassinated, and massacred, clearly not advancing democracy in those countries, unless you want to give it credit for causing a democratic groundswell against those governments. Again, I don't think we advance veganism or vegetarianism by negative nitpicking about relatively minor issues. Instead, let's praise our friends the closer they come to being vegan or vegetarian. Embrace them, help them find their way. Let's unfold the new paradigm together. I the 99% vegan will love, kiss, share and dance with the person who does fish oil, but is otherwise as vegan as I am, thus about 96% vegan, and the person who does dairy, but is otherwise as vegan, thus about 94% vegan. They are far advanced from the people on the standard American diet, and I think Gaia will feel some relief from their efforts. Let's make becoming vegan or vegetarian fun, and more people will join us. , Piers Clement <piers_clement@p...> wrote: > Karen wrote: > > > Amen, Pat. Thanks for the clarification, especially concerning the > > value of all lives. > > Yes thanks Pat, I think it's important we keep a united front on this > otherwise we will be swiftly assailed by well-meaning people who want to > provide us with fish with every meal (as happens to me from time to time). > > The gelatine is a tricky one though - agreed we are " consuming " the capsules > but not really as food or even medicine, they're only there to hold the rest > of the medication together. Surely there must be a synthetic substitute > nowadays - which brings of course the tricky business of discovering which > medicaments use the synthetic substance and which not, and whether to > believe the people who answer your questions about it. > > Who said things were easy? - Piers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.