Vegetarian anatomy

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Wisdom_Seeker, May 23, 2011.

  1. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,788
    A most engaging post and a very nice deviation back to the track.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Fresh baby carrots, the thinnings from my garden. Crisp but not too crunchy.....mildly sweet.......yummy......

    As you don't like them, leaves more for me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,290
    Likewise, if the AKC disappeared, or simply changed it's ways, something else would come along and replace it.

    There are Asian ones and Latino ones--c'mon, don't you watch Law and Order?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    When I'm feeling generous, I acknowledge that the assholes are really a minority--albeit a very large and vocal minority. My problem is that everyone else seems to "tolerate" them, and I'm not keen on tolerating the intolerant.

    I was speaking more to the characteristic "tolerance" of the Northwest, which I perceive as precisely affected tolerance and nothing more, but from the environmental angle I'll say this: it's every bit as much affected--and I'm not talking about tree-sitters, tree-spikers, liberationists, or John Zerzan (or Ted Kaczinski, for that matter), but rather the sort of environmentalists who ride five thousand dollar bicycles, while wearing a thousand dollars worth of spandex and shit.

    They don't really want real change, and they're the sort who like to remember the Martin Luther King who was all about "peace" and "love" and shit, while conveniently white-washing the MLK who said, "I am only effective as long as there is a shadow on white America of the black man standing behind me with a Molotov cocktail." IOW they're not gonna be giving up their SUVs, their foi de grass, or any other aspects of their excessive and wasteful "lifestyles" anytime soon, but they'll happily--and proudly--throw their bottles in a recycling bin and carry a hemp shoulder-bag.

    So I stand by my fascistic contention, and at the same time I acknowledge my own fascistic/statist tendencies, in spite of my anarcho-primitivistic convictions and behaviors. (Only a fool believes that he or she is any less schizophrenic, or wallows any less in cognitive dissonance, than the next person.)

    Sure, but the fact is: you are exponentially (almost infinitely, if we ignore that unreachable limit) more likely to be wronged by another human than a dog. A dog might bite--heck, he might even kill you (though not bloody likely). A human, on the other hand, might stab you, rape you, torture you, rob you blind, etc. The list of human wrongs could fill volumes. Why are pharmaceutical reps allowed to roam free? Cops? CEOs of large corporations? Bankers? Hedge fund managers? Mink "farmers"? Vivisectionists? Members of the AKC? (Again, I could fill volumes here.) When these people, and countless others, are rightly shackled, then--and only then--will I put my dog on a leash.

    I mean, everyone is a potential killer/rapist/whatever, but we trust them until they do wrong--and more often than not, most people continue to "trust" them after they've committed countless wrongs (W.?!?!). Over the past twenty or so years, I've spent alot of time in dog parks--not official sanctioned "dog parks," mind, but ordinary parks where dozens and dozens of dogs roam free. Interestingly, there are seldom any "incidents," and neither are there piles of dog shit all over the place, precisely because these people and dogs are responsible and respectful of the Commons. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for the people without dogs: urban parks are littered not only with litter, but also needles, broken bottles, used condoms, etc. And this is just what they've left behind, I haven't even mentioned what goes on while these people are occupying the parks.

    I'm sorry, but that sounds positively gross. I guess coffee with cream is just brown water with cream added, but I think that's gross too.

    The difference is most apparent in their raw state (which I guess you wouldn't be familiar with), but with tomatoes it's apparent no matter what you do with them. I think the modern, tech-savvy manimal has significantly impaired taste buds and olfactory capabilities; I, on the other hand, by virtue of a focalized seizure disorder, have a considerably heightened sense of smell. I'm nowhere near as gifted as the average dog in this regards, but I can discern differences which are altogether "non-existent" to most people.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,788
    Growing my own fresh veggies, I can likewise attest that there is no comparison between a veggie picked at the peak of freshness and the offerings in most grocery stores, save farmers markets. I suspect that there is considerable loss of quality even in organic produce when it must travel for several days to remote locations and then possibly sit on the retail shelf for several days more before being purchased.

    Persons who eat significant amounts of processed food which are laced with salt and sugar will likely be unable to distinguish the flavor difference, even when significant, as the ingestion of excessive salt and sugar seems to dull the ability to detect other attributes beyond sweet or salty.

    Locally raised organic chicken has a flavor which seems 'strong' when compared to those insipid, identically sized specimens which are factory farmed to conform to market standards. Sure makes some excellent stock once the bones are boiled down though, to utilize in making even commercial veggies more palatable.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,290
    I think you mean "salt and corn syrup" here, but regardless... I think this is partly why "bad" Asian food seems to all taste the same: in many Southeast Asian cooking traditions, certain combinations are emphasized, such as sweet/salty/sour/bitter in Thai cuisine. The mediocre restaurants tend to play this out in, well, typical American-style--just load every dish down with copious quantities of whatever "flavor agents" are being used, and make it really big.

    I say "American-style" for what I would think would be obvious reasons, but I'll clarify: think the American versions of bread, coffee, tea, beer, etc. Just throw some crap together and put it in the biggest container imaginable. The history of the Americano--that is, a shot of espresso with a good bit of hot water added--is rather convoluted, but most tellings have some group--Mexicans/Italians/whoever--concocting a special drink for their American visitors who can't take the real thing by making it really big and really bland and flavorless.
     
  8. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    This is America. It's our duty to tolerate people who disagree with us. The resulting discourse is healthy for all of us. Without those people and that discourse we would go off on some weird tangent that wouldn't be any better than where we are now, and a whole lot less interesting.
    I live in the Northwest too, at least when I'm not out here in Washington earning a living. Humboldt County (Eureka is the county seat) is not very wealthy so the people are a little more real.
    Lovely coinage! Perfect slogan for the Ecotopians.
    We're not all equal in any measure, including schizophrenia (which is rather rare in any significant level) and cognitive dissonance (which is common but comes in many degrees).
    The Constitution only applies to humans. We've barely gotten to the point that all humans in America have the same set of rights. It will be a while before anyone considers extending them to dogs.

    More to the point, in the twelve thousand years since dogs domesticated themselves, they have evolved in their own direction, which is ironically not quite the same direction in which we evolved. They demand considerably less of the types of "freedom" that we demand. They demand companionship (only a few breeds tolerate solitude, much less appreciate it the way Lhasa Apsos do) and the things that come with it such as love and play. Most demand responsibility, although many will settle for the duty of keeping us from taking ourselves too seriously. They need physical exercise, but the level varies vastly from one breed to another. They need leadership, since the alpha instinct is very weak in most breeds.

    But as for running loose in the street, that just isn't one of them. Dogs are territorial and will contentedly stay within their territory, or close to it if it's not fenced; the territory simply has to be large enough to give them the exercise and prowling their breed requires--as I noted, for a Lhasa Apso that's the backyard of a townhouse, although they can easily adapt to a larger area when given their traditional Himalayan monastery job of barking at burglars.

    People who want their dogs to be able to "run free" are anthropomorphizing them, imposing their own values on another species.

    If dogs had picket signs they would more likely read "SLEEP FREE!"
    I'm sure I wouldn't want to drink a glass of my cream-and-water blend, but it's perfectly fine for a bowl of raisin bran with blueberries. I don't drink coffee but I don't like cream in my tea. Ruins the texture.
    And they get worse with age. That's why we older folks like our food a little picante.

    If you laid out the olfactory receptors in the human nose on a flat surface, it would be the size of a handkerchief. If you do the same with those in a dog's nose and packed them to the same density, it would be the size of a full-broadsheet newspaper.
     
  9. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,290
    Just wanted to respond to this part real quick, will address the rest later:

    Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not for people simply allowing their dogs to roam about like that. I am referring to situations in which I am out with the dogs. Of course, likewise for children: I live in one of those places (Philadelphia, at present; western Massachusetts, a few weeks hence) where people let their kids roam free--I mean, little kids, like three or four years old.

    Then again, I recently discovered that Daisy knows how to cross busy streets properly. Obviously, I'd rather she not be doing that without me, but it was an impressive sight nonetheless. She had gotten fed up after several days of non-stop fireworks, and decided to leave a park on her own after some dumbasses, who were sleeping in the park, woke up at about six a.m. and started lighting firecrackers. Daisy bolted, but when she got to the busy intersection, she stopped on the right hand side (of the road--where she ordinarily runs alongside the bike--not the sidewalk), watched the traffic for about thirty seconds or so until it stopped moving, and then ran across the street. Half of the people in this city don't even know how to do that.
     
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    But that's what we'll get without leash laws. If we repeal the leash laws, within two weeks the vast majority of Americans will be walking half a block behind their dogs (because the vast majority of us haven't trained them to do commands like HEEL and STAY), and within six months the dogs will be out running while the humans sit on the porch drinking Margaritas.

    Remember: Most of the time a people get the government they deserve.
    That was common in my childhood in the 1940s and 50s. Everyone assumed their kids were bright enough to not play in traffic, and drivers understood that no kid is responsible 100% of the time so they'd keep their eyes open.

    Nowadays we have the song "Calling All Angels" reminding us that "Children have to play inside so they don't disappear."
    I've posted this before, but here in Washington, one of the many Eastern cities that has been completely taken over by deer, even the deer know how to do that. People see them standing on the curb at a crosswalk, waiting for the light to turn green. I wouldn't have believed that until I observed it myself one night.

    We've kindly killed off all their predators, so intelligence is now a more important survival trait than speed and agility. That's what "natural" selection is breeding them for. They have also figured out that most dogs were at one time bred to be livestock guardians, so they'll jump into your yard at night where your dogs will protect them from the occasional bear or cougar.
     
  11. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,290
    Sure, but when people take their intolerance to the level of action, I believe we ought to draw a line.

    I agree that for the most part that in the Pacific Northwest, the regions outside of the major metropolitan areas are good deal more, uh, palatable. Personally, from an aesthetic perspective, Humboldt County is a bit too hippyish for my tastes, but I can better appreciate the general attitudes and affectations of the people. I have a few friends either living there or from there, one is a John Fahey/Robbie Basho-esque finger-picking style guitarist who has found a good bit of success over the past few years (this guy). We've played a number of U.S. shows and European festivals together in the past, but he gets paid a better chunk of cash than I do.

    I was referring to schizophrenia more in the Batesonian or (R.D.) Laingian sense--that is, the sort of disruptions and incongruities that arise from double bind scenarios. Of course, the degrees to which we're affected and effected vary considerably depending upon our individual worldviews--for instance, it's utterly incoherent to me that a person like Roger Waters can support fox hunting in the U.K.; to others, perhaps not so much.

    Nevertheless, I believe we should and choose to live my life as though we do. IOW I "support" civil disobedience and direct action (and while generally "non-violent," I do not regard "property" destruction as "violent").

    In recent years, there has emerged a trend amongst mainstream environmental and animal welfare (though some claim to be for animal rights) organizations to take a stand against those who engage in civil disobedience and direct action. Not surprisingly, this marked change in attitude coincided with the passage of the Patriot Act, and a litany of related legislation, including the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. One no longer has to actually harm anyone, or even make threats of harm, to be deemed a "terrorist." (See especially Will Potter's Green is the New Red.) I don't think I'm going out on a limb in saying that if MLK were alive today, he would undoubtedly be branded a "terrorist."

    Matters of "rights" are complicated with respect to non-human animals, in that most (excepting dogs, horses, etc.) cannot really abide social contracts, ala Rawls, and so I'm partial to the discourse of "liberation" over that of "rights." What I find especially perplexing surrounding this whole controversy is the attitude of many a scientist: it's almost as though many in science are arguing against Darwin by positing some sort of human exceptionalism. Sure, we're all different, but the differences are hardly as pronounced as many make them out to be.

    One thing I find especially irksome is when a person, scientists in particular, compare the "intelligence" of a dog to, say, that of a ten year old child. It's utterly absurd and meaningless to compare "intelligence" in that fashion: I don't know many ten year olds who can understand not only their own language, but also that of other species. For that matter, I don't know terribly many exceptionally bright thirty year olds who can do that! But I know many a dog who can--and oftentimes with little help (tutelage) from their person(s): there's no ESL programs for dogs.

    But this is getting way off-topic.

    Perhaps, but that is one of the innumerable problems associated with "liberty." Most of us, at least most reasonable people, believe that people ought to be able to do whatever they damn well please so long as it does not infringe upon the "rights" of another. (And I extend this to non-humans, as well). Unfortunately, there's a lot of dumbasses and ignorant people out there. I like to believe that few are genuinely acting out of malice, rather they are acting out of ignorance. Regardless, acting out they are, and I'm not sure what the solution is. It's times like these when my fascistic and statist tendencies arise.

    Have you spent much time in Western Europe? In many countries you'll note that dogs can go just about anywhere, and I don't know whether or not they've got "leash laws" (I'm sure they do in many places), but many roam at liberty--and they behave proper-like (like my dogs

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ). Largely, because they--the people and the dogs--are better educated.

    Likewise, observe traffic on major highways throughout Canada and Europe and compare with many a U.S. You'll note that in multi-lane traffic those furthest to one side are all moving the fastest, and those furthest to the other are moving the slowest. Why? (IMHO) not because it's the "law," but simply because it makes sense. Why the difference? One can only speculate, but methinks it's got something to do with education and feelings of entitlement.


    Edit: On consideration, I don't think this would be the case:
    I mean, if marijuana were legalized, would everyone --who aren't presently--just start smoking pot? Doubtful. And I think likewise for leash laws. I kow I certainly wouldn't behave any differently, and most people like me wouldn't--we don't want our dogs running around in the streets on their own. As to the people who would just let their dogs roam, so far as I can tell, I think they already are! So it would unlikely make much of a difference, just less revenue for the city.

    As with my traffic example, people do what they do because it makes sense to them. I don't believe that laws really affect the behaviors of people all that much.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2011

Share This Page