| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Room for Rent
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Higher Fiber Intake for a Longer Life
 | |||||
| |||||
| Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine 5100 Wisconsin Ave., N.W., Ste. 400 Washington, DC 20016 | Phone: 202-686-2210 E-mail: info@pcrm.org | ||||
Sunday, February 06, 2011
Types of Vegans
I distinguish three (3) broad categories of vegan practice (real vegan practice, not 'pretenders' to be vegan, who may or may not be vegetarian):
* Dietary vegans (includes rawfooders involved with diet ONLY)
* Lifestyle vegans (who exclude ALL products resulting from exploitation of sentient beings in their lifestyle: clothing, food, accessories, household furnishings, medication as much as possible, etc.). These folks MAY CALL themselves 'ethical vegans' if their motivations are ethical (or altruistic), but there's much quibble room here
* Abolitionist vegans (who work for the abolition of all exploitation of sentient beings, and the abolition of all structures, industrial processes, and business or military operations that exploit animals).
I place vegans doing rescue operations in the 2nd category UNLESS they are working for structural upheaval (not merely punitive legal action for welfare violations). I do NOT believe that animal rescue operations are in themselves abolitionist actions.
These distinctions can be helpful in sorting out here folks 'are coming from' in their conversations about 'veganism' and 'vegan' this and that.
I do NOT believe that things OR food can be vegan; they MIGHT, however, be vegan-friendly. I believe that ONLY persons can be vegan by one or more of these categories.
What's awesome?
Recently I was complimented that 'my thoughts are awesome' and that I'm doing 'awesome work'. Really, though, after my gut reaction to the compliment (one I consider to be undeserved), I had to note that, in my own self-understanding, I don't think that my thoughts are 'awesome' as much as they are conditioned by my choices to be around smart, critically-thinking, discerning, concerned, did I say SMART, well-read, accomplished, highly-disciplined, did I say VERY SMART and disciplined. Of course, I work at Harvard and treasure that opportunity, and a number of the friends and acquaintance I would like to bring closer to me are both ethical vegans and lifestyle vegans (dietary vegans who include an ethic of avoiding products of animal suffering in their lifestyles). Raw fooders (a type of dietary vegan) are interesting and, when they get good results, often quite admirable at that level. But I'm interested in the critical thinking that CAN come from disciplined, caring ETHICAL vegans.
Choosing who conditions us CAN be an ethical choice. Responsibility for what we do with our energies probably IS an ethical choice. I'm really not very good at that.
I would like to think about optimization of my energies (and others' energies) vs. ad hoc claims by others (coming from all around each of us, often with little accountability for the outcome of any 'aid' that is given to them).
Helping out nonhuman animals surely goes TO them without any sense of accountability on their part for converting our aid to them into their service to others. Humans don't show a very LARGE amount of that accountability, either, but at least we have social cultures around the world in which, occasionally, the issue is mentioned and sometimes raised to a level in public consciousness. Of course, often notions of 'accountability' are selectively applied - to highly visible persons.
Of course, I'm also interested in the SCIENCE around dietary veganism, and again, I treasure my good fortune in working with the Harvard School of Public Health. I only wish that 'professional vegetarians' and 'professional vegans' could systematically engage those resources for 'the greater good' of all.
Saturday, February 05, 2011
The problem
'In a perfect world' is often heard around here, where I am; perhaps, where you are, that phrase is also heard. Surely, we'd be literary characters in Candide if we believed our world to be 'perfect'; even many of those who claim to believe in Intelligent Design talk about a tragic flawing that occurred at some point.
Given that we PROFESS to be ethical in regard to animals, there is something about the claim that rings false when we're SO unfair in our application of that regard, based upon any animals' vulnerability to the mortal designs of converting their bodies into meat for meat-eaters.
Sociologically, I find quite interesting - distractingly interesting, - the earnest desire to walk around the moral difficulty of affirming OUR place in this tragic scheme of things while at the saem time claiming that all humans can be vegan, safely, albeit for ethical reasons.
If there's an ethical mandate to be vegan, which we can safely do, with a little forethought, support, discipline, and that ethical mandate has to do with the 'at risk' status of nonhumans who are often killed for their muscle tissues, is there any moral mandate for us to kill those animals to feed OTHER TYPES of beings who may have different physiologies (than ours) which require certain amino acids found NATURALLY only in animal tissues?
I see NO moral obligation for humans to accept that kind of role; it seems like the worst hybris to claim it.
Thursday, February 03, 2011
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Are we 'obligate carnivores' (or 'obligate herbivores')?
Years ago, when I (started and) ran the Boston Vegetarian Society, I invited comparative anatomist, Dr. John McArdle, then Scientific Director of NEAVS, later Scientific Director of the Humane Society of the United States, to speak on the anatomical argument for vegetarianism.
Dr. McArdle was then a lacto-vegetarian for ethical reasons.
Dr. McArdle's conclusion, after walking us through the anatomical argument for vegetarianism, was that the idea is faulty for a variety of reasons (which he listed!).
So, for specific reasons, he rejected the argument IN FAVOR OF ethical arguments for vegetarianism. Ethicists like to consider the relative legitimacy of each of the arguments offered against or in favor of a point of view or course of action, and if outcomes (vegetarian practice) are to be sanctified (as consequentialists/utilitarians wish to do), then due diligence (prudential reason) brings us to seriously and systematically consider whether or not there is utility in arguments that only a few believe (e.g. how many go vegan because of 2-3 naked 20-something coeds on vegan diets, whatever their motivations?).
I want to cite a great Israeli philosopher, Dr. Nir Eyal of Harvard:
"For the consequentialist, consequences are everything - EVERYTHING!" Consequences (of a course of action/s) is the same as results or outcomes.
So, one MIGHT say that questionable arguments (or even good arguments) are 'good' (according to the consequentialists) to the extent that they effectively motivate thinking folks who consider them towards the desired or desirable actions or course/s of action. By this account, one COULD argue that faulty arguments are 'bad' or undesirable to the extent that they yield undesirable results (in motivating behaviors). Of course, should behaviors be decided on the basis of ethical arguments? What is the status of ethical arguments.
Dr. Randall Collura (PhD, Biological Anthropology, Harvard, 2006), a lifelong vegetarian (now a vegan) ALSO gives a talk on this topic and reaches conclusions like that of Dr. McArdle, that the anatomical argument for vegetarianism is invalid because it's (a) logically faulty AND (b) is contradicted by the facts (which likely were NOT evident to those who developed the argument, when it was developed). It may seem persuasive to some, but it fails falsification tests. Remember that the anatomical argument for vegetarianism is NOT an ethical argument; it is purportedly a descriptive claim about the propriety of the feasibility of nourishing ourselves on botanical foods ONLY.
The more widely held view today is (a) that we humans are omnivorous BUT (b) that we are NOT 'obligate carnivores'. We do not NEED to eat meat to survive or thrive, but we are ABLE to derive nutrients from all manner of soft tissues - from animals or from plants.
Ecorazzi - 2 February 2011 - Celebrity GreenWatch
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
"Walk Like An Egyptian": A Playlist For "A Moment of Promise"
Here's hoping President Obama's words today that, "This moments of volatility" must become "a moment of promise" actually comes to pass. In the meantime, here are some promising songs for a very volatile moment in world history. And here's hoping everyone in Egypt can read The Huffington Post -- or anything else they want to read-- very soon. "Walk Like A Egyptian" - The Bangles "There's A Riot Goin' On" - Sly & The Family Stone "A Change Is Gonna Come" - Sam Cooke "Changing Of The Guard" - Bob Dylan "Wild In The Streets" - Garland Jefferys "Get Up, Stand Up" - Bob Marley & The Wailers "You Haven't Done Nothing" - Stevie Wonder "Respect" - Aretha Franklin "Riot" - Miles Davis "Riot Gear" - Regina Spektor "Little Egypt" - The Coasters "Simple Song Of Freedom" - Bobby Darin "Fortunate Son" - Creedence Clearwater Revival I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free" - John Legend & The Roots "Ordinary People" - Neil Young "For What It's Worth" - Buffalo Springfield "I Predict A Riot" - Kaiser Chiefs "Killing In The Name" - Rage Against The Machine "Wake Up Everybody" - Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes Now wake up, and please add your own songs for Egypt.
"Walk Like An Egyptian": A Playlist For "A Moment of Promise"
Here's hoping President Obama's words today that, "This moments of volatility" must become "a moment of promise" actually comes to pass. In the meantime, here are some promising songs for a very volatile moment in world history. And here's hoping everyone in Egypt can read The Huffington Post -- or anything else they want to read-- very soon. "Walk Like A Egyptian" - The Bangles "There's A Riot Goin' On" - Sly & The Family Stone "A Change Is Gonna Come" - Sam Cooke "Changing Of The Guard" - Bob Dylan "Wild In The Streets" - Garland Jefferys "Get Up, Stand Up" - Bob Marley & The Wailers "You Haven't Done Nothing" - Stevie Wonder "Respect" - Aretha Franklin "Riot" - Miles Davis "Riot Gear" - Regina Spektor "Little Egypt" - The Coasters "Simple Song Of Freedom" - Bobby Darin "Fortunate Son" - Creedence Clearwater Revival I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free" - John Legend & The Roots "Ordinary People" - Neil Young "For What It's Worth" - Buffalo Springfield "I Predict A Riot" - Kaiser Chiefs "Killing In The Name" - Rage Against The Machine "Wake Up Everybody" - Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes Now wake up, and please add your own songs for Egypt.
"Walk Like An Egyptian": A Playlist For "A Moment of Promise"
Here's hoping President Obama's words today that, "This moments of volatility" must become "a moment of promise" actually comes to pass. In the meantime, here are some promising songs for a very volatile moment in world history. And here's hoping everyone in Egypt can read The Huffington Post -- or anything else they want to read-- very soon. "Walk Like A Egyptian" - The Bangles "There's A Riot Goin' On" - Sly & The Family Stone "A Change Is Gonna Come" - Sam Cooke "Changing Of The Guard" - Bob Dylan "Wild In The Streets" - Garland Jefferys "Get Up, Stand Up" - Bob Marley & The Wailers "You Haven't Done Nothing" - Stevie Wonder "Respect" - Aretha Franklin "Riot" - Miles Davis "Riot Gear" - Regina Spektor "Little Egypt" - The Coasters "Simple Song Of Freedom" - Bobby Darin "Fortunate Son" - Creedence Clearwater Revival I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free" - John Legend & The Roots "Ordinary People" - Neil Young "For What It's Worth" - Buffalo Springfield "I Predict A Riot" - Kaiser Chiefs "Killing In The Name" - Rage Against The Machine "Wake Up Everybody" - Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes Now wake up, and please add your own songs for Egypt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)