The Heart Centric Perspective on Veganism

[ilja]

@Danioover9000  relative to what?

[aurum]

11 hours ago, Forestluv said:

I don’t assume that killing animals is dark or distorted. 

I am pointing out distinctions of intimacy and how conflation can cause cloudiness. Gazing into a woman’s eyes as she orgasms while making love is a form of intimacy. Gazing into a woman’s eyes as she takes her last breath during strangulation is a form of intimacy. Grouping them both together as “intimacy” is correct, yet is a very crude, low resolution view. 

Then I don’t see how this relates to the conversation.

Okay, so there are “high” resolution forms of intimacy and “low”, crude forms of intimacy. So what?

Unless you are saying killing and eating animals is a form of that low, crude intimacy, then I’m not seeing the relevance. And if that is what you’re arguing, then I’ve already pointed out that I disagree, and that such a conclusion is founded on faulty assumptions.

[ilja]

@Zeitgeist it is pointless, i believe these characters here have some sort of brain defects. keep your energy for yourself and do only minimum work responses.

they will not be able to grasp.

watch for the ones that do have the ability to see.

Edited May 5, 2021 by ilja

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

Then I don’t see how this relates to the conversation.

Higher resolution views can provide clarity. 

1 hour ago, aurum said:

Okay, so there are “high” resolution forms of intimacy and “low”, crude forms of intimacy. So what?

Unless you are saying killing and eating animals is a form of that low, crude intimacy, then I’m not seeing the relevance. And if that is what you’re arguing, then I’ve already pointed out that I disagree, and that such a conclusion is founded on faulty assumptions.

I'm not using "low resolution, crude" in that context. 

Imagine an alien comes to earth and is learning the concept of "intimacy". As examples of intimacy, the alien is shown two people gazing into each other's eyes as they make love and the alien is shown two people gazing into each others eyes as one is being strangled to death. Both are extremely intimate moments. Yet this is a crude view because it lacks the relative nature of "light" and "dark" as perceived through the eyes of the beholder. The alien may want to share intimacy and go out strangling people to death. People then point out the relative nature of "light" and "dark". This brings in another dimension into higher resolution, yet the event is not inherently "light" or "dark", it is both light and dark as well as neither light nor dark. The alien's view will be molded by it's angle of perception. If the alien hangs out with serial killers, it will come to understand the wonderful beauty in strangulation intimacy. If the alien could enter the mind of a serial killer, it would directly experience the wonderful beauty of strangulation intimacy. . .  Yet if someone points out that strangulation intimacy is also dark, it will reject that view. Since strangulation intimacy is "light", it cannot also be "dark". It will disagree with anyone pointing out the dark nature because any such conclusion is founded on faulty assumptions. From the understanding that strangulation intimacy is "light", it is true that any conclusions that strangulation intimacy is "dark" is founded upon faulty assumptions. However, this is a contracted view. Imagine that the alien gets to experience strangulation intimacy from the perspective of being strangled. This is also an extremely intimate experience, yet know it would be perceived as a "dark" intimacy. The alien would realize "Ooohhhh, so this is what people were talking about the dark nature of strangulation". The alien would then understand that strangulation is 1) intimate, 2) wonderfully intimate and 3) darkly intimate. However, whenever the alien spoke of the "dark" aspect, those that only understand the "light" aspect would say "you believe that strangulation intimacy is 'dark'. Such conclusions are based on faulty assumptions". . . Within the contraction that strangulation intimacy is light, it is true that all conclusions that strangulation intimacy is dark is faulty. 

As well, recognizing the relativity of "light" and "dark" nature is still a surface-level view, in particular the *other side* that has been labeled as faulty. For example, we could say "Yea, yea, yea. What someone sees as 'light' or 'dark' is relative", yet the embodiment is much stronger on one side. For example, your understanding and embodiment is much stronger on the "light" side. Even if such a mind recognizes conceptually that what we perceive as "light" and "dark" is relative, the understanding and fluency is much stronger on one side. If one wanted to deepen understanding and fluency on another side, a lot of work and effort would be needed. 

[Danioover9000]

@ilja

3 hours ago, ilja said:

@Danioover9000  relative to what?

   Okay, I'll be a bit explicit, list some examples.

   Veganism plant based diet is relative compared to 80% plant, 20% other diet, compared to fruitarian based diet, compared to plant root diet, compared to paleo diet, compared to Atkins diet, compared to ketogenic diet, compared to high carbs diet, compared to low carbs diet, compared to low fat diets, compared to low protein diets, compared to eating insects, compared to various forms of fasting, compared to low/zero sugars diets, compared to meat only diets. Notice how your mind is making sense of this short list.

   Now, I know that most, when they say diets, they mean short term of eating some other foods for some specific reasons, like weight loss or health as common goals, to me diets are similar to ways of eating as a life style. I'd also include cultural cuisines in the list of diets as well, like Japanese sushi and other Japanese ways of eating, Korean cuisines, Chinese cuisines, Mediterranean cuisines, Greek  cuisines, Italian cuisine, European cuisines, and so on. As you see, plant based is not the only way of eating, and Veganism is also not the only ideology out there. I say some of this because I've travelled to several countries, lived and eaten their foods and absorbed some of their cultures in me. I live through these foods and ideas from those cultures! That's why I'm more sensitive to when people sound like thay are closed minded and shrink around particular ideas and ways of eating as the only way of life. This is not true from my lived experiences of travelling the world and interacting with various cultures.

   I do sound like I'm dunking on Veganism and plant based diets as I'm more sorry for the plants, as well as meat eaters, but if you say Veganism and eating plants works for you, I'll say good, keeping going. If you say to me it's working for you, as a diet and lifestyle 80% of the time, I'm still gonna say good for you, now go identify the 20% that's not working for you and change that around, if you are open to changing that around.

   If I sound like a jerk, just know that I'm normally not one. Also, if you want to continue discussing the way of eating, okay. If you want instead to discuss the morality of Veganism, okay. Just know that too is relative.

[Danioover9000]

@Zeitgeist

24 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

@Danioover9000 so what?

What?

[Danioover9000]

On 01/05/2021 at 5:04 AM, Emerald said:

Hello all!

As someone who eats a plant based diet, I’ll often find threads on here about Veganism.

And there is a pattern I notice around lack of holistic thinking relative to this topic... and others.

Lots of more intellectual and logic-based perspectives and not a lot of credence given to heart-based perspectives.

For example, someone might share the truth that... ‘There is no way to stop causing suffering to other beings. We kill so many life-forms every time we step on the grass.’ OR ‘Plants are alive too.’ And the list goes on.

And these are perfectly true and logical perspectives. But they are often used to bypass and overlook more heart-centered perspectives like the darker and grittier empathy we can realize when we observe the suffering of another sentient being.

So, these more intellectual truths often insulate a person from the awareness of how they really feel about animal suffering.

This isn’t the only topic this happens in relation to. Lots of elevating mind-based perspectives over heart-based perspectives in general. It’s just the clearest example of this.

The main point here is to say that, if you value becoming multi-perspectival and holistic in you POV, you must integrate the heart-based POV.

And you must be discerning enough to know which perspective is wisest to take in any given situation. We can use truths from either perspective to lie to ourselves. That’s how sneaky self-deception can be.

Sometimes, the logic/mind-based perspectives will be wisest. Other times, choosing this perspective will lead to major blind spots, rationalizations of “devilry”, and intellectual bypassing.

Sometimes, the heart-centered perspective will be wisest. Other times, choosing this perspective will lead you into ungroundedness and distorted thinking.

Basically, with regard to Veganism and topics like it... don’t bring a knife to a gun fight. 

   So, the solution is more open mindedness?

[Emerald]

4 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

   So, the solution is more open mindedness?

No. The solution is more open-heartedness.

[Flowerfaeiry]

Unfortunately most of the meat we get has been killed unconsciously. I would love to be able to kill a wild animal and have that be part of my food source for a few months. It's not easy to take a life and it takes a very open heart to do so consciously. 

 

Biggest problem with veganism is many humans just can't thrive on plants alone. Not all the calories, supplements and food variety in the world can change the way a body uses nutrition from an animal. Except for the perspective it gave me, I regret the 5 years I wasted on veganism. 

[ilja]

@Flowerfaeiry

Granted that you actually were vegan (which I am suspicious about, to be honest).

A person that were vegan out of heart for the animals but could not continue to live of plants, because of some weird make up, I expect to say something this alike:

"Veganism is beautiful and I totally understand the reasons behind it especially as some who was vegan for the animals, but I unfortunately cannot live on a vegan diet at the moment for xyz reasons, but I appreciate every person who is vegan and would encourage people to be vegan if they can."

Someone who was vegan for the animals, does not regret having been vegan.

So I don't know, to me it seems like you either had some distorted reasons of or for being vegan or of how you were vegan or ..

Edited May 5, 2021 by ilja

[Forestluv]

4 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

   So, the solution is more open mindedness?

 

8 minutes ago, Emerald said:

No. The solution is more open-heartedness.

I'm gonna go into a stream of consciousness and play with this prompt. . . 

Open-mindedness and Open-heartedness both open doors to exploration. Open-mindedness is more about allowing the cognitive thought mind to relax and become open to new ideas. For example, if someone traveled to a foreign country, they might have cognitive open-minded toward learning about some rituals of the culture. Experiential open-mindedness would be attending and participating within the ceremony. They might have good cognitive and experiential open-mindedness, yet lack open-heartedness. Lacking open-heartedness would be perceiving as a separate entity. "Aren't those natives over there interesting. I can't wait to post videos of the ceremony on IG. It's kinda weird, yet if that's what they want to do in life, good for them!". 

Open-heartedness has a different element. Open-mindedness would be needed to travel to the country and immerse oneself into the culture. Yet open-heartedness would be needed to make empathic, feeling, human, energetic connections - not just to other humans, yet also to the environment: animals, trees, huts, vibe, history, Mother Nature present. It's a different realm than an analytical/intellectual/reason realm. Some beings are more oriented toward entering open-hearted spaces, others not so much. I'd say the biggest block to entering open-hearted realms would be 1) The intellect trying to control the narrative,  2) fear of vulnerability, 3) fear of intimacy, 4) fear of rejection and 5) lack of body/beingness awareness. 

The blocks to open-mindedness are more about cognitive narrative control of a self identity. The blocks to open-heartedness are more about feelings. 

Just some free-flowing thoughts. 

 

[RendHeaven]

On 5/1/2021 at 0:04 AM, Emerald said:

Hello all!

As someone who eats a plant based diet, I’ll often find threads on here about Veganism.

And there is a pattern I notice around lack of holistic thinking relative to this topic... and others.

Lots of more intellectual and logic-based perspectives and not a lot of credence given to heart-based perspectives.

For example, someone might share the truth that... ‘There is no way to stop causing suffering to other beings. We kill so many life-forms every time we step on the grass.’ OR ‘Plants are alive too.’ And the list goes on.

And these are perfectly true and logical perspectives. But they are often used to bypass and overlook more heart-centered perspectives like the darker and grittier empathy we can realize when we observe the suffering of another sentient being.

So, these more intellectual truths often insulate a person from the awareness of how they really feel about animal suffering.

This isn’t the only topic this happens in relation to. Lots of elevating mind-based perspectives over heart-based perspectives in general. It’s just the clearest example of this.

The main point here is to say that, if you value becoming multi-perspectival and holistic in you POV, you must integrate the heart-based POV.

And you must be discerning enough to know which perspective is wisest to take in any given situation. We can use truths from either perspective to lie to ourselves. That’s how sneaky self-deception can be.

Sometimes, the logic/mind-based perspectives will be wisest. Other times, choosing this perspective will lead to major blind spots, rationalizations of “devilry”, and intellectual bypassing.

Sometimes, the heart-centered perspective will be wisest. Other times, choosing this perspective will lead you into ungroundedness and distorted thinking.

Basically, with regard to Veganism and topics like it... don’t bring a knife to a gun fight. 

On 5/2/2021 at 9:04 PM, aurum said:

I take no pleasure in causing suffering to an animal. But I also do not believe I am above taking a life to sustain life. And I don’t take that responsibility lightly.

What are you afraid of losing by being vegan until the day you drop dead?

[RendHeaven]

@Forestluv Loving that the structural format of your free-flowing is mind-centered (distinction-making, elaboration, numbering, defining, concluding) despite the topic  

Edited May 5, 2021 by RendHeaven

[Forestluv]

1 minute ago, RendHeaven said:

@Forestluv Loving that the structural format of your free-flowing is mind centered (distinction-making, elaboration, numbering, defining, concluding) despite the topic  

Very nice insights! I was not aware of that. Thank you!

[Flowerfaeiry]

16 minutes ago, ilja said:

 

A person that were vegan out of heart for the animals but could not continue to live of plants, because of some weird make up, I expect to say something this alike:

"Veganism is beautiful and I totally understand the reasons behind it especially as some who was vegan for the animals, but I unfortunately cannot live on a vegan diet at the moment for xyz reasons, but I appreciate every person who is vegan and would encourage people to be vegan if they can."

Someone who was vegan for the animals, does not regret having been vegan.

That's just an assumption you're making. 

[ilja]

@Flowerfaeiry

and it's not one out of the blue. Assumptions are not wrong by default, you know. I believe it is reasonable.

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by ilja

[Flowerfaeiry]

5 minutes ago, ilja said:

@Flowerfaeiry

and it's not one out of the blue, I believe it is reasonable.

 

Consider that an individual would feel anger at the foresightedness of the vegan message that "everyone" can be vegan. Unless they have some, as you say, "weird" makeup. 

[ilja]

@Flowerfaeiry

then you did not understand my point.

Edited May 5, 2021 by ilja

[Flowerfaeiry]

2 minutes ago, ilja said:

@Flowerfaeiry

then you did not understand my point.

Oh ok. Where did I misunderstand your point? 

[aurum]

34 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

What are you afraid of losing by being vegan until the day you drop dead?

What are you afraid of by not being vegan until the day you drop dead .

I was vegan for ~two years. Not afraid of it. Its ideological claims simply don’t hold up to scrutiny. Veganism is not inherently an ethically superior position relative to animal rights. It’s not going to solve the environmental crisis and may not even move us in the right direction. And it’s not a healthy diet for many people, if not most of them.

That’s 0-3 of the things I care strongly about. Veganism is out.