they should be all vegetarians
Moderators: kevinswatch, Orlion
they should be all vegetarians
I reckon that the people of the Land should be vegetarians. If for no other reason than simply extending the logic of their lives. They love and respect nature, use wood and stone without damaging them - ie fire without destroying wood. They have no destructive behavious where nature is concerned whatsoever. But then we are expected to believe they slaughter animals and eat their flesh? Why not a peaceful vegetarian society - that'd be more in fitting with their beliefs.
Of course, many will disagree. Who cares. It's a book, not real life. But humour me. I think it would be more logical if the lords and the people of The Land did not eat dead animals.
Of course, many will disagree. Who cares. It's a book, not real life. But humour me. I think it would be more logical if the lords and the people of The Land did not eat dead animals.
I must admit I considered this as well, even to the point where I thought how can the people of the Land eat at all? Think about it. To grow crops, you have to often clear areas of Land which may be wooded, or do they just find a clear spot and hope for the best? Then you have to take into account those people which don't use wood or stone lore, such as the Ramen. How do they make fire? Do the Lords etc approve if they simply burn wood? Do the Lords try and teach everyone how to use the Lore?
I wonder how the nature loving Lords felt about the Ramen chopping down trees for fire etc. assuming that they did. I remember in TIW when Shetra and Verement travelled on the raft, SRD made a point of saying that the Bloodguard found a dead tree with which to build a raft. If there had been no dead trees, would they have abandoned the whole raft idea?
- Zarathustra
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19641
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
As "nature lovers" (as some here describe the Lords) it would not make any sense whatsoever for them to be vegetarians. Vegetarianism is NOT our natural state. We evolved to be meat eaters. So abstaining from our biologically programmed eating patterns would be a DENIAL of our nature, and a denial of our place within the NATURAL food chain.
You "nature lovers" crack me up with your denial of those aspects that most closely tie us to nature. Our most intimate connection with the animal world is when we to take our place within the infinite chain of life-arising-from-death, i.e. the living feeding on the dead. This IS NATURE. Trying to pretend otherwise is inauthentic and silly.
Not everything about the natural world is cute and inoffensive. Some things about nature are difficult for the squeemish to except. (Just check out the breastfeeding thread in the Think Tank for evidence of this.) But you can't make nature something it is not. From such "pure" intentions, the doorway to Despite is opened. After all, Covenant refused to kill Lord Foul in TPTP because he realized that even Despite is part of nature, part of himself, and couldn't be killed in this way.
I've always thought that vegetarianism is just a gentle way to deny the reality of death within the natural world. But death is part of life. We should all rejoice in this "miracle" which allows new generations to spring from the old, for in consuming the dead (whether it be plant or animal), we derive our life. This is nature, folks.
You "nature lovers" crack me up with your denial of those aspects that most closely tie us to nature. Our most intimate connection with the animal world is when we to take our place within the infinite chain of life-arising-from-death, i.e. the living feeding on the dead. This IS NATURE. Trying to pretend otherwise is inauthentic and silly.
Not everything about the natural world is cute and inoffensive. Some things about nature are difficult for the squeemish to except. (Just check out the breastfeeding thread in the Think Tank for evidence of this.) But you can't make nature something it is not. From such "pure" intentions, the doorway to Despite is opened. After all, Covenant refused to kill Lord Foul in TPTP because he realized that even Despite is part of nature, part of himself, and couldn't be killed in this way.
I've always thought that vegetarianism is just a gentle way to deny the reality of death within the natural world. But death is part of life. We should all rejoice in this "miracle" which allows new generations to spring from the old, for in consuming the dead (whether it be plant or animal), we derive our life. This is nature, folks.
- The Laughing Man
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 9033
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 4:56 pm
- Location: LMAO
- Zarathustra
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19641
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
Good point, Esmer. Come to think of it, I don't actually remember anyone eating animals in the Chronicles. It's always liquor and berries. Maybe some bread. And didn't Foamfollower have some gigantic oranges?
I don't even remember people under the Sunbane eating meat. Hmm. . . can anyone point out an example?
I don't even remember people under the Sunbane eating meat. Hmm. . . can anyone point out an example?
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
- The Laughing Man
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 9033
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 4:56 pm
- Location: LMAO
- The Somberlain
- <i>Haruchai</i>
- Posts: 615
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 11:25 am
- Location: Brussels
- Contact:
The first time I read it, I actually missed every reference to eating meat, and decided that they probably were vegetarians; after all, it doesn't seem to go with their Oath of Peace too well.
But my re-read indicated that they do (I think it mentions them eating beef in Lena's home). So... I dunno.
But my re-read indicated that they do (I think it mentions them eating beef in Lena's home). So... I dunno.
Clearly the people of the Land ate meat. I disagree that by doing so their love of the Land was, as a result, somehow tainted. If you use our World as an example, there is clearly a food chain within the animal kingdom that is designed for nurture but also to maintain a balance amongst plants and animals. I would presume the Land required the same type of balance. Thus, people (And other animals) eating meat seem totally appropriate and required for the good of the Land.
I don't know if I could be bothered right now, as I need to make some dinner (vegetarian if you must know ), but I would just say that you should realise there are many, many people in the world who disagree with your contention that "Vegetarianism is NOT our natural state. We evolved to be meat eaters." Personally, I would say we evolved to be opportunistic herbivores, and that our body is designed on a biological level to function best on a vegetarian diet.Malik23 wrote:As "nature lovers" (as some here describe the Lords) it would not make any sense whatsoever for them to be vegetarians. Vegetarianism is NOT our natural state. We evolved to be meat eaters. So abstaining from our biologically programmed eating patterns would be a DENIAL of our nature, and a denial of our place within the NATURAL food chain.
So you shouldn't talk as if we are talking about facts here. It is a very condescending attitude.
Malik, you really need to take a chill pill. Your assumptions about vegetarians are offensive and condescending to the extreme. I'm sure it's not only meat eaters that can "rejoice in this "miracle" which allows new generations to spring from the old" as you say. Because as you yourself note, it can also be from plant life, that we derive our life from. We don't have to kill a cow to survive. Not only is it unneccesary, our health is better if we do not. So don't give me your closed minded stance of superiority. Accept that people think in many ways, and that you cannot be so sure of the supposed truth which you spout.Malik23 wrote:I've always thought that vegetarianism is just a gentle way to deny the reality of death within the natural world. But death is part of life. We should all rejoice in this "miracle" which allows new generations to spring from the old, for in consuming the dead (whether it be plant or animal), we derive our life. This is nature, folks.
- Avatar
- Immanentizing The Eschaton
- Posts: 61765
- Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
- Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 22 times
From the Meatlore Thread:The Esmer wrote:can anyone name any "food" animals in the Land that were even mentioned? Besides slave animals, war animals, and magic animals, what else is there that would be a "food" animal?
And I can point out one from Runes of the top of my head, because I found it amusing that SRD chose that animal to mention.Syl wrote: LFB, Ch. 6, Legend of Berek HalfhandLFB, Ch. 11, The UnhomedIt was a bountiful meal: there was cold salt beef covered with a steaming gravy, wild rice, dried apples, brown bread, and cheeseWhen Covenant loosened its drawstrings, he found salt beef, cheese, old bread, and more than a dozen tangerines as big as his two fists, as well as a leather jug which he could hardly lift.
The Ramen serve a stew of "wild" Eland. Which, in case anybody is unfamilair with them, is an African antelope. It's also the biggest antelope. Fully mature adult bulls weigh nearly a ton. I tried to imagine the Ramen hanging off one's neck by one of their garrottes.
--A
- drew
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 7877
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:20 pm
- Location: Canada
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Triock was a cattle herder.The Esmer wrote:can anyone name any "food" animals in the Land that were even mentioned? Besides slave animals, war animals, and magic animals, what else is there that would be a "food" animal?
I thought you were a ripe grape
a cabernet sauvignon
a bottle in the cellar
the kind you keep for a really long time
a cabernet sauvignon
a bottle in the cellar
the kind you keep for a really long time
- Avatar
- Immanentizing The Eschaton
- Posts: 61765
- Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
- Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 22 times
Sorry for the double post.djaef wrote:...I would just say that you should realise there are many, many people in the world who disagree with your contention that "Vegetarianism is NOT our natural state. We evolved to be meat eaters." Personally, I would say we evolved to be opportunistic herbivores, and that our body is designed on a biological level to function best on a vegetarian diet.
Although I do agree with much of what you said Djaef, I do disagree with that bit that I quoted.
although we can take much of our requirements from plant matter today, and although we did evolve as opportunist omnivores, we would never have reached our current state if our ancestors had not eaten meat.
Our evolution was shaped as much by the very fact that we hunted as by anything else. And our ancestors were heavily dependant on the protein and fat that a carnivorous diet was able to provide.
Indeed, many of our social habits today are adapted, not from the lifestyle of a herbivore, but from that of a carnivore.
If we had not eaten meat in our history, we would not be able to have the luxury of vegetarianism today.
If we truly had evolved as herbivores, our digestive tracts would be designed along the lines of ungulates, to extract the far smaller quantities of energy from plants more efficiently.
Man would never have become the animal that he is if meat, and the hunt, had not been a vital and intrinsic part of our development.
--A