Is Our Advanced Brain A Justification For All Our Actions?

Sanjeev posted this in Debate on July 25th, 2009

Today, I got a comment on the post God Made Us Vegetarian, We Made Ourselves Meat Eaters from Mr. Biswas. It reads as follows:

Hi Sanjeev,

At the cost of giving you more propaganda (which is your sole objective it seems) I am writing this. Firstly, what is this whole fight about animals being living beings and plants not, so cruelty etc. what kind of logic is that? Secondly, in your articles there is a mention of EVOLUTION, wonder what it means. I feel it means some species are smart and evolve and along with that their characteristics evolve. So if over a period of 100 thousand years humans evolved to start eating meat, then that’s nature for you. You mean to say you should have a bigger say than nature? Thirdly, as rightly said by Akhilendu, don’t give us all these humbug about Acquisition, Disarticulation and Consumption (fancy words though) Acquisition, Disarticulation – will you stop eating cereals, pulses Consumption – will you stop cooking your food? or stop eating all those items that need to be cooked before they are eaten.

Try eating raw rice or wheat or any of the pulses and you are sure to have an upset stomach (just like the lion when he is fed grass – deja vu??). Well, God is a great friend of mine too. He told me I was supposed to have the milk of my mother only. That was his original design. But unfortunately, his design also included brains for man. The sucker that man is, started sucking the milk of, cow, buffalo, goat, camel and then not only for drinking! (Acquisition???). When was the last time any of us sucked milk out of the udders of a cow??

Man take a chill pill. And let nature take its course. Being a veggie or non-veggie is a matter of choice only because man has got an advanced brain (unlike other animals). Its the brain because of which you have this PC and the keyboard in front of you, and you are able to debate on it. Had it not been for the brain, man would have evolved in the 100 thousand years and would eat whatever they evolved into, AND WOULD NOT DEBATE. Chill man. We have got your POV. Take rest.

Biswas,

First I thought that I will reply to it on the comments section only, but when I sat down to write and finished my reply, I thought I’ll post it as an article. So, here is my reply:

Hi Biswas,

First of all my many thanks for having taken the time to have read the article and posted your comments.
I do not know how you concluded that I want more propaganda, and to what end? Politicians make propaganda; people who want something in return from others want propaganda, not “simple” souls like me who are only expressing their views by this medium called internet.
I wish you had spent some more time and read the other posts on the blog also and then you would have realized that at no point in time have I said that animals are alive and plants are not and hence please stop cruelty. I can direct you to read some of the posts specifically such as:
You state, “Secondly, in your articles there is a mention of EVOLUTION, wonder what it means. I feel it means some species are smart and evolve and along with that their characteristics evolve. So if over a period of 100 thousand years humans evolved to start eating meat, then that’s nature for you. You mean to say you should have a bigger say than nature?” Well my position is a little different from you. Man started to eat meat is NOT nature, but yes when he started to eat meat, he EVOLVED into a meat eater, that is nature. And there is a very subtle difference between the two statements. AND, the fact that nature helped man into becoming a meat eater should not be taken to mean that nature has given its approval. The punishment that nature delivers for going against its design takes time in coming and when it does, there is nothing you can do about it.
Also if I assume the above logic of yours to be correct then it would mean that man evolving into a trigger happy, nuclear bomb maker and dropper is also nature. And that is absurd – It is like the man who went about taking credit for all the good he did and for all the bad he blamed the hand of God or nature.
With regard to the fancy words like Acquisition, Disarticulation and Consumption, let me assure you that I take no credit for them – they are part of the English language – been there for much longer than me – and I just used them! Just as you use words like “take a chill pill”!
You have repeated what Abhikendu said in his comment when you ask, ”will you stop eating cereals, pulses Consumption – will you stop cooking your food? Or stop eating all those items that need to be cooked before they are eaten. Try eating raw rice or wheat or any of the pulses and you are sure to have an upset stomach (just like the lion when he is fed grass – deja vu??).” I suggest you read my reply in the post “Is Human Design Indeed a Vegetarian Design”.
And Biswas God could not have told you that the original human design was for drinking mother’s milk alone. Why? Because God himself drinks animal milk! I think what we need to understand is that my stated position always has been that all living beings live off other living beings and hence there is no sin in eating another life – as long as you do not go against the natural order. If I can drink my mother’s milk and digest it, then I can drink an animal’s milk and digest it too. Similarly, fancy worded principle of Acquisition, Disarticulation and Consumption to acquire, disarticulate and consume is a universal principle and applies to both animals and humans. What I mean is that just as I cannot eat animals, I cannot also eat humans and vice versa. Dogs eat dogs and other animals. Lions eat lions and other animals. Human beings can domesticate cows, milk them with their own two hands and drink the milk without having to boil. All naturally. What is against natural order is to fatten the cows, give them hormones, use machine on their udders and suck them dry. That is a result of man’s greed. That’s all.
And finally, please do not justify all human action by such statements as, “Being a veggie or non-veggie is a matter of choice only because man has got an advanced brain (unlike other animals)”. Man needs to know how to use his advanced brain in the right direction – not making bombs, not killing the girl child in the mother’s womb, not using deprecating language (like take a chill pill man) without provocation, and thousands of other such behavior. Or does that also qualify as “matter of choice because of our advanced brain?”