I feel that an apology is necessary.
To anyone I have ever known who is or was a vegetarian, and who I may have mocked, derided, or belittled, I am sorry. It was a mockery born of ignorance and intolerance, and one which I am genuinely remorseful for. This apology has been a long time coming, it has been years since I recognized the error of my ways and determined that not only were the dietary habits of others something that was none of my business, but the choice to intentionally reduce the amount of death and suffering you levy against other living creatures is an admirable trait. So again, I am sorry.
I was reminded of this long overdue apology because I have recently made the decision to alter my diet in the direction of vegetarianism. First stop: Pescetarian.
The transition has not been easy. It hasn't even been two full weeks and there are times when I see someone else eating some chicken or beef and it's all I can do not to snatch it from their plate and devour it in one giant carnivorous bite. I imagine (hope hope hope) I will eventually get to the point where that is no longer a major issue because I don't know if I have enough will power to resist that kind of impulse for the rest of my life.
The first question anyone asks when learning of my new eating habits is "why?" so I may as well try to get it in writing. I find that I can no longer morally justify the death of other living creatures in order to satiate my personal dietary whims. I am of the opine that if I can find the appropriate sustenance from plants that have no capacity for pain or suffering then that is preferable to sustaining myself with the death of creatures that can suffer.
The question that follows is generally why I will still eat the fishies. As I mentioned early in the blog I do have an end-goal of vegetarianism in mind, so I hope to eventually exempt fish from my plates. I am keeping fish because the last few times I tried to go vegetarian and eliminated all meat straight away it didn't last, and I think it was partly just too big a transition. Being a pescetarian will allow me to ease my way into the lifestyle, and get my digestive system more accustomed to the reduced meat and increased plant life it is seeing. Additionally, fish are less cognitively capable of experiencing pain and suffering, which is my primary guidance in the switch to vegetarianism. (Were scientists able to reach a consensus and determine that fish do not experience pain in any negative way other than 'pressure there probably means I'm getting eaten by a bigger fish...swim awayyyyy' I could conceivably stick with pescetarianism forever). There obviously has to be some manner of cutoff where I decide it is acceptable for something to die for me to live, so I believe it is something of a moral balancing act.
I've also faced the "Will you ever go vegan?" question a few times, and I cannot answer that one, because I really don't know. I can, however, answer that if I ever (seriously) declare moral superiority over those who have chosen to continue eating meat I would like someone to punch me. Maybe kick me a little as well. I think vegetarianism is a gray moral area, and therefore cannot assume that my personal interpretation of the situation is intrinsically more valid than anyone else, but I would be more than glad to have a discussion about it with others. (I have discovered it is somewhat difficult to properly express via text conversations, so an in person conversation would probably be easier...but I'll gladly discuss over IM too).
10 comments:
well, this certainly answers a lot of my questions.
and also, I won't mock you, I'm just a great man.
/mock! /belittle! /make-fun-of-in-a-condescending-manner!!
well, I'm all right.
You're right that this is a morally gray subject, and I can't ridicule you too much as one who is incapable of physically digesting steak...
If it floats your boat, fine with me, but keep an eye on your energy level and emotional state, I know that sounds weird but I knew some people who switched in college and they weren't the same people anymore. literally.
-Ty
I would posit that the order of happenings for those people who became vegetarian were different than you currently think they are.
That is to say, they weren't the same people anymore, and part of becoming different people was a change in diet.
You need not worry overly with me, as my decision has been something I've wanted to do for many months, so any of the personality changes should probably be apparent by now.
Additionally, your Firefly quote would have worked better if you'd started it with "I won't mock you, tolerance is the mark of a great man."
ooo, that WOULD have been better.
I meant not so much lifestyle and attitude, but actual biochemical changes that occur from switching diet too fast. your middle step seems like a very good idea.
I wish you luck. Sounds like you're mentally prepared, but like Ty said, the physical part of it will likely be much tougher.
Can I volunteer for the punching part?
Fish are friends! Not food! Kind of disappointed I didn't recognize the Firefly quote - guess I'll have to watch it again.
Don't forget about the mercury, and protein from other sources (but I think you'll probably be okay if you keep eating lentils the way you do).
If you eat a lot of tuna, there's some info in a Green Guides mag (not sure it's easily searchable on the web) about what kinds of tuna are healthier than others and how often you should eat them because of the mercury. The article also has info on which varieties of tuna are fished with concern for the ocean and ocean-dwellers. Think Jaime has the mag now, but I'll hunt it down for you.
Since a formal introduction has not yet been possible, let me introduce myself as Jenn's friend. I enjoy reading your take on life but have never commented, simply because of our lack of introduction. I feel compelled to ask a few questions about this particular post, simply because I have also made a recent change in my diet. I hope you don't mind my curiosity as I am trying to work out these issues myself.
I agree that all animals deserve protection from pain and suffering. However I have a question about the following statement: “I find that I can no longer morally justify the death of other living creatures in order to satiate my personal dietary whims.” How do you feel about Mother Nature and a wild animal's instinct to eat other animals? I ask because I find no reason to believe that humans are anything but animals. Yes, we have opposable thumbs but in my own experience you could dress the majority of the human race in Meerkat costumes, film their behavior for a month, play the results alongside any other episode of Meerkat Manor and you'd be hard-pressed to tell the difference. In this way, I feel as though eating meat is not necessarily morally incorrect nor cruel. It is simply part of the circle of life.
My next dilemma is the belief that fish are any different than cows, chickens, dogs, cats or again, humans. You make the comment, “Additionally, fish are less cognitively capable of experiencing pain and suffering, which is my primary guidance in the switch to vegetarianism.” I do not question the validity of your statement. Instead, I'm hoping you can point me in the direction of a source that confirms this statement. Since making changes in my own diet I find eating in restaurants very difficult. I always resort to fish with the unsubstantiated hope that fish do not suffer the way other commonly consumed animals suffer. However, in the back of my mind I still wonder if my decision is any less cruel than the decision to eat chicken. Radar is a fairly recent discovery of the human race. Bats on the other hand have used radar-like “technology” since the beginning of time ... assuming bats existed at the beginning of time. :) Given the knowledge that human intelligence is severely limited, how do we really truly know what another living creature feels or experiences? How do we know that in the next X years someone won't prove that fish actually feel MORE pain than the average animal? Yes, fish brains may be proportionally smaller than other creatures but how do we know that deep down in the center of that tiny brain there isn't a type of cell, unknown to humans, that actually makes fish extremely intelligent creatures? I've seen more than one fish writhe on the end of a hook in a mad attempt to get away from their captor. They often bleed during this frantic fight for survival. How can we be sure that their demise is any “nicer” or “less painful” than a steel rod to the back of the head? In the words of Phoebe Buffay from Friends, “Wasn't there a time when the brightest minds in the world believed that the world was flat? And, up until like what, 50 years ago, you all thought the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open, and this like, whole mess of crap came out. Now, are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this? “
My last question concerns dairy products. Dairy animals often endure extremely cruel torture every single day. I might even go out on a limb and say that dairy animals often endure more severed torture than animals raised for meat. How do you feel about dairy products? Do you plan to change your dairy habits? How about eggs? The animals that produce these products may not die for your eating pleasure but they do suffer on a daily basis.
I am an animal lover. Jenn can confirm this. I want to do what is right by all animals. I do not find any reasonable justification for feedlots, cramming chickens into tiny cages, painful beak trimming, gestation crates or any other cruel treatment of animals. There is simply no excuse. I also realize that I'm just one little person so the world will not change for me overnight or at all. However, I do possess one thing that makes people listen to me – the almighty dollar. I determine where my dollars go and I no longer send my dollars to any meat/dairy producer that cannot verify humane treatment of their animals. A lengthy and exhausting search revealed a couple meat producers that raise their animals the old fashion way. An even longer search lead to dairy producers that I believe produce healthier, humane products. The end product is considerably more expensive but I also believe it to be healthier. After all, animals that live in stressful situations will surely produce meat/dairy products containing stress-related chemicals. How can they not? Regardless, I cannot change the world alone but I can reduce my own impact on the Earth and I can make dietary decisions that benefit myself and the entire animal kingdom. I'm hoping that by exchanging ideas with people like yourself, I'll be able to make truly educated decisions. Thanks again for posting your thoughts on making morally correct dietary choices and a thank you in advance for any thoughts you have related to my questions!
Vanessa
Nice to e-meetcha Vanessa.
On your first point, I will agree that humans are still essentially animals, but in addition to our opposable thumbs we have evolved enough cognitive capacity for making decisions about morality. When a mountain lion takes down a deer it is doing nothing more than responding to instinct, there is no higher level reasoning taking place. Humans, however, are able to make such moral distinctions, and we are able to override instinctual impulses with mental reasoning. My personal reasoning in this regard is that I need not adhere to the food chain when I can make the decision to reorganize my position in the chain that intentionally reduces the suffering I levy against self aware creatures.
On your second point, I am a strong adherent to science and believe very strongly in the scientific method, so I am prone to believing in scientific findings until such findings are actually proven to be wrong. In this regard, science tells us that fish do not experience pain. (I actually just recently came across this article, and it may convince me to stick with my pescetarian diet...who knows)
I agree with your assessment that dairy and egg producing animals are not necessarily kept in the most humane of conditions, I do not intend (at least, currently) to stop consuming dairy or eggs. I would, however, be very much interested in learning of your sources of dairy. I choose not to eliminate them from my diet mainly because they don't require death of the creatures in question, and I'm not quite hardcore enough to drastically alter my food intake if death isn't on the line. (Just as a choose to never go in against a Sicilian if death is on the line).
In addition, I'd like to comment on your quote about scientific beliefs. (I know, not your own words, but I'd like to address them).
The phrase "are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this?" is the one that I take umbrage with. Adherence to scientific findings is not the mark of arrogance, so much as the mark of rationality. While it is true that mindless adherence in the face of new evidence is arrogant, to assume that our current findings in science are correct is the only rational course of action one can take.
For example, I can live my life assuming that while science may tell me there is no evidence for invisible pink unicorns that guard me while I sleep, they are still there, but does that kind of delusion provide any tangible benefit? Or, as you suggest we can imagine that fish perhaps have some manner of feeling pain that defies our current understanding of psychology and biology, but then what stops us from believing that plants feel even more strongly than the fish do, are in fact more intelligent than humans, and have only been kept from ruling the planet because they never evolved the proper motor functions? Perhaps they have been trapped in place, wallowing in their misfortune for centuries and vegetarians truly are the worst offenders of murder.
This kind of belief is not useful though, and I find it is of benefit to only act on empirical evidence and what scientific knowledge we currently possess.
Finally, just a few moments to reply!
Thank you so much for the article on fish. In return I can provide the results of my dairy/egg analysis. I purchase dairy and eggs from Organic Valley (http://www.organicvalley.coop/) or Horizon Organic (http://horizonorganic.com/). Organic Valley claims to distribute products originating from small family farms that must adhere to “high” standards including inspections. Horizon Organic claims to utilize holistic vets in order to proactively keep their herds healthy and strong. I also try to purchase eggs at the local Farmers Market however they go fast. San Antonio isn't exactly what you'd call a hotbed of “granola eating hippies” demanding socially responsible choices. Our Farmers Markets are rather small and hard to find. You may have better luck in CO!
I did giggle when I read your second post. I probably should not admit it, however, I often wonder if plants feel pain or in some other way sense the world in a manner humans will never understand. Every time I cutback my AeroGarden plants I feel a small sense of guilt. Similarly, I still battle with the idea that fish feel less pain or feel pain in a different fashion than humans. Currently scientific findings provide conclusions that I want to believe in. I'd certainly feel a sense of comfort knowing that the fish on my plate never suffered. I just find it hard to believe that with only 5 ways to sense the world around us we can ever claim to really understand what another living entity may experience.
I also completely understand where you are coming from and do not criticize your position at all. For many years I found comfort in scientific findings (and I still do) that explain the world I live in. The facts were all I needed. But what are facts? How do you find the true facts? How do you determine if a specific statement is a fact? Let me give an example. Many Western scientists and doctors denounce alternative medicine such as acupuncture and have done so for years. Eastern cultures have used acupuncture to prevent illness and promote health for centuries. The proof was in the pudding so to speak. Eastern cultures knew for a fact, that acupuncture could be used to keep themselves and their animals healthy. Unfortunately, scientists in the Western world could not “prove” the benefits of acupuncture like they could penicillin and therefore dismissed the practice. However, recent scientific findings reveal that many aspects of Eastern medicine previously considered bogus have true scientific backing. Eastern cultures combined an admittedly rudimentary scientific proof with something that might be considered faith to concoct effective medical techniques. Were medical techniques like acupuncture enhanced after Western proofs supported their validity? No. Were the benefits obtained using acupuncture felt only after Western medicine created proofs allowing such results? Again, no. Such examples lead me to believe that science limits itself by rejecting certain forms of “faith” and “intuition” in favor of sticking solidly to the facts. An entire world of undiscovered truths may exist and be arbitrarily rejected if the scientific community refuses to question itself and its findings.
With that said, I agree that the scientific methods Western culture developed over time allowed and continues to allow for amazing discoveries. Further, I agree that ignoring scientific fact is irresponsible. As far as we can tell, science accurately describes much of the world around us and how can we dispute that? I just wonder how much more we might know if science combined proven facts with gut instinct. There's a very interesting take on this idea in a book called “Blink” by Maxwell Gladwell (http://www.gladwell.com/blink/index.html). You may find it interesting.
And once more, thank you for sharing your views. I'm sure my dietary choices will prove to be a topic of great internal debate for the rest of my life. Understanding the dietary choices other people make only helps me solidify my own thoughts and opinions.
Post a Comment