Shaming non-vegans is not right.

[Schizophonia]

19 hours ago, Basman said:

In my opinion, the healthiest diet is a semi-vegetarian diet because you'll eat more veggies and avoid more of the processed garbage while still covering both nutrition and taste. I think this is much more realistically possible for most people than veganism.

vegetarianism doesn't exists in nature. 

[Emerald]

5 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

vegetarianism doesn't exists in nature. 

That's only because the consumption of dairy past infancy (and from another species) is only something that humans do.

So, both Vegetarianism and the standard Omnivorous diet aren't found in nature. 

That said, it doesn't mean that human beings are able to consume these diets. Humanity is also part of nature. And our nature is different from the nature of other species.

So, the notion of something "natural" being synonymous with "good for you" isn't scientifically sound.

You actually have to look at meta-analyses that cross-reference many studies on how different diets tend to impact human beings to find out the optimal diet for human beings.

[Schizophonia]

9 hours ago, Emerald said:

That's only because the consumption of dairy past infancy (and from another species) is only something that humans do.

Humans are also the only ones to wear clothes or make tools, it's natural for humans.
By does not exist in nature, i mean that has not been involved in the evolutionary process.

Many human ethnic groups have developed the ability to manage lactose and dairy proteins, and most humans consume at least processed dairy products to remove these indigestible products (yogurt, kefir, cheese ...)

Veganism is literally not found in nature (in humans evolution), there have been tribes and even civilizations (Indus Valley civilizations) carnivorous or almost, but not vegan.
Even Ayurveda does not recommend veganism at all, honey, meat and milk are considered superfoods if digested: Veganism is an ascetic drift even in Indian culture.

Quote

So, both Vegetarianism and the standard Omnivorous diet aren't found in nature. 

Humans are highly adaptive omnivores, with a tendency toward carnivory.
There are plenty of animals to trap and kill in nature, but there are not fields of nuts, fruits, grains, and vegetables. And when you do find a fruit tree by chance, there aren't many because insects and small mammals have consumed most of them. Even figs in nature are hard to find because even with a thick layer and few calories, insects and mold come and devour everything as soon as they start to ripen a little.
Eating fruit in quantity is an agrarian affair, therefore modern, therefore non-evolving.

Quote

That said, it doesn't mean that human beings are able to consume these diets. Humanity is also part of nature. And our nature is different from the nature of other species.

Yes i'm agree.  

Quote

So, the notion of something "natural" being synonymous with "good for you" isn't scientifically sound.

What is good is to do what is suitable for our system, and what is suitable is the result of an evolutionary process that has been imposed on us.

Quote

You actually have to look at meta-analyses that cross-reference many studies on how different diets tend to impact human beings to find out the optimal diet for human beings.

Meta analyses are biased, both by obvious epistemological biases but also ideological ones.

Carnivores are also biased, for example animals in the wild are lower in saturated fat than modern farmed animals, because instead of getting their calories mainly from starch (which is converted more into long-chain saturated fatty acids) they get them from plants, nuts, fatty fruits rich in polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats.
Humans also evolved mainly with fish and seafood, not modern grazing ruminants rich in long-chain saturated fats, whole and often raw milk rather than cheese etc etc, more biases.

Edited Sunday at 12:54 PM by Schizophonia

[Basman]

16 hours ago, felixk_priv said:

@Basman @Basman 1 )  little steps turns into bigger and bigger progress overtime 

2)  think of veganism in the same lens of all the other ethical progressions we have made as a society . Feminism , racism .. this is one of the next ones 

 

15 hours ago, felixk_priv said:

@Basman I have been looking for a genuine perspective for why ,   an baby chicken deserves to feel the sensation of having it's throat slit any more than a human toddler  . 

Perhaps you weren't calling this specifically childish ,  but if you mean that in terms of this please share your perspective 

The fact is that people perceive animals differently. I think the view that vegans hold that animals are equivalent to humans morally is because many vegans didn't grow up with animal husbandry and are used to anthropomorphize animals through pets and media. If you grew up hunting seals for a living you would understand that exploiting animals doesn't inherently mean cruelty. Animals aren't equivalent to humans because they aren't sentient. And in a broader sense, exploitation is necessary for human society to survive. Its a bit of a luxury view in my opinion which is why I call it childish. A child doesn't have to contend with survival. 

Now, vegans make a good argument for individual welfare. And the treatment of animals has improved and continues to improve with time. In my opinion, veganism is like communism. Its main feature is the critique but the end game of either ideology is untenable. Animal husbandry is most likely going to continue for as long as humans exist.

[Basman]

On 11/01/2025 at 10:37 AM, AION said:

I wouldn't call it vegan. I would just call it a balanced whole food diet without processed foods. Processed vegan burgers are as bad as processed meat burgers.

Its funny, because its basically just eating more veggies.

 

[Shane Hanlon]

Serious props need to be given to @Emerald @Something Funny @Scholar and @Michael569

I deeply appreciate you guys putting in the effort to address the same psychological pitfalls and lack of understanding that are brought up over and over again. I do not have the energy to do that. But it is really important work.

For those genuinely considering a vegan diet here are high-quality resources.

This article is one of the least biased pieces of media I have ever read and is chock full of relevant statistics.
https://80000hours.org/problem-profiles/factory-farming/

 

Here is the most comprehensive study ever done on the environmental impacts of different diets. Download this and ask ChatGPT questions about it.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325532198_Reducing_food's_environmental_impacts_through_producers_and_consumers

 

If you watch Earthling Eds debate videos, you will find that your exact argument comes up in almost every one of these. And you can see how your thinking could be flawed:

If you want to see how animals are treated in our modern-day context this documentary is brutally honest, representative of 95%+ of all animals and free to watch.

And finally, when you make it through the insane mess of an information-scape that we live in today, you will likely come out vegan.


If we can live healthily and harmoniously without causing unnecessary harm to animals, it becomes a moral, ecological, and compassionate imperative to choose to do so.

 

[felixk_priv]

@Basman   @Basman   

Animals are sentient obviously ?  In terms of pain and feelings . Do you mean because humans can do maths ? 

 

 

[Basman]

19 minutes ago, felixk_priv said:

@Basman   @Basman   

Animals are sentient obviously ?  In terms of pain and feelings . Do you mean because humans can do maths ?

You only need to tag me once or is this like an excited kid calling out for someone twice in a row?

No you are right, sapiens is probably a better term.

 

[felixk_priv]

@Basman @Basman   @Basman   

Yes exactly right 

This is the thing , do you really think that because humans can do maths and they can play a guitar , they deserve to feel the sensation of having their throat slit any less than a human ?

Genuinely ??

[Basman]

1 hour ago, felixk_priv said:

@Basman @Basman   @Basman   

Yes exactly right 

This is the thing , do you really think that because humans can do maths and they can play a guitar , they deserve to feel the sensation of having their throat slit any less than a human ?

Genuinely ??

Do you think wild animals deserve to be eaten alive by predators? Or do you think we have a duty to intervene in nature to save the poor animals?

These aren't things that aren't done for fun. Its part of survival. I can see the argument but the problem is that I just don't see veganism being tenable on a societal scale for multiple reasons. And there are probably things that make up your life that you don't pay attention that are arguably unethically sourced, like your phone or your clothes. You don't question how your vegetables where made either with pesticides or your countries geopolitics. Right now your tax money is going to bombing people abroad. But farm animals is the one thing you are ideological about?

There's a degree of entitlement to wanting everyone to adopt your views on a thing that isn't inherently immoral. Animal husbandry isn't needless cruelty for the sake of it.