Objective truth/Truth deals with relationships
-
Idol free, you said
Yes, the tool has allowed us to mimic the animal claws/fangs to reach nutricious foods, so why would we need to go against our own stomach and eat animal fleash unless we had to?
Here is the bias. And the main partof this bias is what is underlined. First you analyzed what human beings should eat based on our basically given capacities. Then when it is shown to you that our basic capacities allow us much more than what can be seen from a very limited and simple analysis of the fangs and claws of a few species you subtlely still imply without basis that we are going against our stomachs by eating animal flesh.
So you are showing that you think eating animal flesh is disagreeable despite analyzing the logic of nature and despite the Quran, because as Ayman put it there are allegories in the Quran that imply that flesh is good and can be eaten by human beings, according to God's natural order. Are you against drinking milk also? The Quran refers to rivers of milk and honey as good. Are you okay with the honey but not with the milk? Are you accepting part of the book and not the whole book?
I still do sometimes eat raw meat, as many cultures do. I actually enjoy it and have never had any problems. As for the restaurant idea there are states that state that however the customer wants the food product you have to give it to them. Warning labels and such on waiting areas or menus can cover any other possible legal issues. People coming to eat raw foods know what to expect. Ethiopian restaurants serve their raw meat dishes all the time, no problem, no hassles, no lawsuits.
There is another theory of disease out there if your ever willing to check it out. You can see it through analyzing those sites that I gave you. The main basis behind this theory is "Disease is cause by poisoning or mal-nutrition only. Bacterias, yeasts, fungi and other microbes only feed on dead and damaged tissue and assist the body in cleansing itself through eating this tissue. The wastes that they leave then prompt the body to eliminate." This system however, is founded upon constant and pure, high-quality raw nutrition as well as an unpolluted envirnoment. Without such nutrition one will be subject to various cleansing processes going on in the body that deal with bacteria and parasites. Most of us are subject to those processes anyway to varying degrees. The constant chemical poisoining that we suffer from in modern societies from pollution, to home cleaning products, to medicines, to vaccines undermine the successfulness of this true system to maintain homeostasis.
The alternative approach is the one that has worked so well for modern medicine. If you sterylize the environment and halt the synergy that goes on between the body and the microbes in it, which work to clean out the body from poisons (most times in an uncomfortable way) then you halt the symptoms and seemingly "heal" the patient. At the least you alleviate his symptoms.
A highly nutritious, natural and least processed cooked diet, that includes raw foods and fermented foods can also mock the all raw diet system in a natural environment because the toxins created by cooked are not too drastic that they can't be dealt with by an omnivores' system, but the diet must have raw foods (especially some key animal foods), heavily emphasized in it. Polluition from medicine and the environment also undermine the effectiveness of this system to maintain homeostasis.
You didn't exactly answer this statement of mine
Your hands can pick up a cockroach or a cricket, or a beetle but I'm sure you shudder at the thought and think of eating a bug as an abberation.
You jumped straight at the coconut issue. In the coconut issue you admitted that tools are essential, but I wanted to see a reaction to this comment since it followed your initial logic of basic "natural capacity."In the end what basis do you have to think that eating meat is wrong, harmful or disturbing to our stomachs? I know you arguments when it come to raw, but the same arguments can be argued for raw fruits and vegetables. Raw meat, can be free of all the harmful bacteria and parasites that "cause" diseases, through careful raising and testing. Just like fruits can be full of harmful microbes that can "make" people sick hepatitis, fungus, molds, other bacterias, etc.
Ethiopians, the brothers of Egypt and that whole region, including the Nubians ate raw meat often. The Ethiopians have national dishes of Raw meat and the Sudanese eat Raw liver soaked in a peanut sauce. The somalians eat raw meat as well, and all of them have drunk raw milk for millenia. There is a story in greek literature that has two ethiopians (which could have even been in Egypt as Ethiop just means burnt-face) wrestling down a cow, Cutting a piece of its leg out, patching the cow up and then letting it go and sharing the fresh meat.
Believe me the idea of nature, what is natural, vegetarianism as a natural way, etc. is a very Indo-Aryan, European concept. It is not one that is very African and because of that I know that it is not very Egyptian either. Hindus (whose religion is called such because it comes from the hindis are mainly derived from the northern, Aryan tribes, close to russia. The "Pagans" or "heathens" from the European perspective like the Aborigines, the Native Americans and African peoples, as well as the South East Asian peoples are more in line with Natural Princples, diet wise, than the Hindus or the Europeans. Jamaican Rastafaris are a product of being heavily influenced by this European thought, despite their Anti-European sentiments they are a recent phenomenon born out of an environment where African ideas and European ideas had been mixing for centuries. The mixing is most times never equal and often sides with conqueror or the powerful of the times. Cubans, depsite how "white" they might look and really be are heavily influenced (more so than black jamaicans and black Americans) by the African cultures and their religions that were brought to the Americas. You would never find them turning away from eating meat, as their traditions emphasize the life importance of blood and animals.
Do you not want to eat meat because you think the animal suffers when you kill it? Those are the people who fear death and who believe in caste-system as to the inherit worth of God's beings (humans and animals(higher beings) and then the plant world(lower beings)). Do you not want to eat animals because you think they are unclean? Those are the people who think that biological life is essential disgusting (even their own bodily processes and functions). They think "the flesh" is dirty, lowly and not spiritual. Do you not want to eat meat because you think it is unnatural for humans? Those are the people who most times haven't analyzed nature enough. They look at the natural world as 'appropriate, 1 to 1 relationships, i.e. this is for that, and that is for this'
But nature is never that simple and defies these one to one relationships. The same people who say milk isn't a natural food for humans are these people. They look at a cow and its baby and then say a cow doesn't drink milk as an adult, so why should we? A cow doesn't drink milk as an adult because no mother cow can adequately feed another grown cow or bull. The mother pushes the calf away when it is big enough to manifest this natural fact that she can't produce that much milk, and she also has to recuperate to be able to have another calf and feed that calf.
In the natural world, every creature is out for its own survival. No carrot wants to be eaten, that defeats the purpose of is growth. But God allows us through knowledge and wisdom and his grace to be able to capatilize on the weaknesses (as this is a natural principle of life) of other creatures to be able to survive ourselves. That is God's rule (deen) with nature. This is the rule (deen) of survival.
The principle of milking a cow is genius. Milk provides a lot of nutrients that allow a baby to grow. A cow, buffalo, camel, donkey, horse, goat, sheep can provide more milk than any woman can and can feed more people. Raw milk is chock full of vital, live nutrients, especially when the animal is getting good quality natural food (in most cases for these animals this means fresh green grasses or even fermented green grasses). Not tons of corn.
When you pasteurize the milk you cut down on the nutrition and in some nutrionists minds create toxins in such a specialized food. Plus, you don't have to kill the cow, so its more economical. Well I going to stop here but let me re-emphasize some of the questions I asked you and would like for you to answer.Do you not want to eat meat because you think the animal suffers when you kill it? Do you not want to eat animals because you think they are unclean? Do you not want to eat meat because you think it is unnatural for humans? What basis do you have to think that eating meat is wrong, harmful or disturbing to our stomachs?
Godbless,
AnwarCheck out http//www.westonaprice.org/traditional_diets/index.html
-
Dear KGB,
Idol-free is talking about abstract practices that do have their worth when we are trying to understand what is true. He is basically, through examples trying to clarify that the word we use for 'truth' can mean more than one thing and that depending on the situation the truth can be different. What is 'true' doesn't always have to do with straight informative facts, but can also have to do with approriate relationships between different things, or natural functions, etc., etc.
I think that idol-free is a little eccentric at times and focuses on things that are not always very important in my view. But I think that what he is saying now definitely has some merit, although it is very abstract I admit. It's merit is in that we are all trying to seek "the truth" here so it is important to understand that "the truth" is not always that black and white bull's eye that we think it is.
Godbless,
Anwar -
'Eccentric'... rotfl
-
Peace be upon you KGB,
Sorry you feel that way, but you are always welcome to add your own understanding. Peace to you.
-
Peace all. I quoted the word eccentric because i found it funny...Im pretty eccentric myself... o yay
However,i feel brother idol-free (from his posts.) is a very enlightened and clever man,with brilliant ideas,and a sincere,open mind.... bravo sun
I think you have mis-understood him KGB...When i first used to read his posts i thought his ideas were indeed 'eccentric' and very strange...But now i know better...The man is a genius... -
Peace be upon you KGB,
I have been here long enough not to allow words to influence my feelings. In fact I hope to stand as an example of how to respond with the good response rather than get sucked into my lower nature.
Dont worry about it and I look foward to having poilte discussion with you as well.
-
Peace idol-free. One of the reasons why i respect you,is precisely because you guard your lower emotions when provoked...A lesson for us all... bravo
-
Peace be upon you ProGod,
Have you checked out those sites?
No, I will go there now.
Are you still in Philly?