Ok yeah that is pretty crazy. I'm never sure if people like that are for real or just trolls.

IME, a lot of that sentiment arises from awareness of the documented suffering implicit in modern intensive farming methods, on a literally unimaginable scale.

No-one needs to eat meat, in quantity, every single day. So we don't need to slaughter a billion caged chickens a year or whatever... Fewer chickens, reared in more natural conditions, would make for better meat, for slimmer, healthier, more disciplined consumers, who showed greater appreciation...

[quote=SpartanII][quote=Lizz]

I simply made an observation and offered a suggestion based on my positive experience with Castaneda's techniques. If I came off as arrogant, that's your interpretation. I never suggested that anyone adhere to my way of thinking (I'm sure you don't know me well enough to even know my way of thinking). Also, you're thinking of the wrong Don Juan. Castaneda's teacher, Don Juan Matus (whether true story or allegory), was a Toltec shaman, not the 15th century womanizer. [/quite] ahh I misunderstood my apologies.







Youre right I don't really understand it. I've never read his books (or heard of him for that matter) and only know of them by what narrow quotes you posted here. I suppose they weren't the full picture of what this author's beliefs Entail. To me it Just seemed to advocate apathy. Still, I'm not entirely convinced that letting go of ones sense of self or ego is a wise decision. Nor can I agree with you completely that "clinging" to a cause is necessarily a bad thing either. A lot of people have done tremendous amounts of good by believing in something With all that they have, although there are two sides to every coin.

I might just read those books but they will have to wait in line

I wouldn't attribute my reaction to what you are implying though. There isn't a human on this earth I hate more than myself. I just saw you as being kind of judgemental yourself, and I'm somewhat cantankerous and pointed out a perceived instance of hypocrisy, but now I see that this person is a total Looney hypocrite themselves (you demonize someone for murdering animals and then say that all carnivores should be killed??)

I agree. I believe we need food production reform across the spectrum. I think getting into the "you eat meat, you're bad, I eat plants I'm good" fight just detracts from the real issue.

I find mega scale Mono crop agriculture just as disturbing as animal factory farming. When you fly over where I am from, the land looks horrible. Everything sectioned in to squares, all the natural vegetation mowed down long ago, wild life displaced. Now just section after section of canola, wheat, mustard, corn etc. for millions of acres. The earth looks scarred, the soils depleted of minerals and infertile, now saturated with herbicides and pesticides.

I see things like permaculture and the stuff that guys like Allen Savory are doing like mimicking natural grazing patterns, as the directions we need to go.

I dig Joe Rogan, especially enjoy his talks with Graham Hancock on DMT and Ayahuasca. Like someone else mentioned, it opens dialogue on the subject, amongst millions of people. Although, Ive yet to find any. I discovered Deemz on my own and havent had the pleasure to share my experiences with anyone yet. Nor am I too comfortable to bring it up to harldy anyone. The couple times Ive tried, I havent been real comfortable talking about it, the crazy looks I have gotten ya know. However, I do look forward to the day I meet some like-minded individual, preferably a lady friend, that is open and as interested as I am in psychedelics and see their therapeutic value.

One of the things about Joe Rogan is that he tends to be a bit too conspiracy minded (by my standards at least). He once doubted that we landed on the moon, and often takes the words of people like Rupert Sheldrake for granted.

It's not the ego itself that's the problem, it's our attachment to it (and its associated thoughts and fear-based emotional reactions) that drains us of the energy we need to fully engage in life, change our thought patterns, connect us to our Spirit/Source, expand our awareness, and face the known and the unknown with clarity and intensity- so in that sense it's actually the opposite of apathy.

"Energy flows where attention goes." -Huna Principle



Like I said, it's about balance. I don't think it's wise to cling to anything, especially something as subjective as beliefs, which can change depending on the point of view they stem from. Over-attachment, or "clinging" to any one point of view can narrow your perspective, making it more difficult to be open to other viewpoints. Detachment fosters clarity since it doesn't let us get too close to anything and lose our objectivity.



Hating yourself is just a form of self-pity. Self-importance and self-pity are two sides of the same coin. Both are forms of ego-attachment.

"It’s very possible that everybody is exactly the same at the core, but we’re just living these different existences through different biologies, personalities, sexual needs and wants and life experiences. One of the best ways to treat people is to treat them as if they were you living another life. Every person you run into is literally you living another life. If you lived my life, you would be me. If I lived your life, I would be you. I would have your experiences and your genes. Treating others as you would like them to treat you is too abstract. I’m saying treat them as if they ‘were’ you. If we really are one, then I am you and you are me.” ~Joe Rogan/Joe Rogan Experience Podcast…



Apparently this is not a very new Joe Rogan quote, but I just ran across it and think it's awesome.

I get the sense that he is scared of it.

Rogans had a good week of guests so far

I like him but he seems to be extremely repetitive nowadays

I admire Joe Rogan. I don't like that he speaks of the DMT-pineal gland hypothesis like it's a fact but other than that I think he's cool. He's a psychedelic advocate and we need those in our society. Just my 2 cents

Unlike plants, fungi or bacteria, the animals you are referring to are sentient, conscious beings capable of feeling pain, feeling fear, a wide range of emotions, have a decent level of intelligence for certain tasks similar to a human baby for example.

If you think torturing and killing innocent human beings is wrong, it would only make sense that you at least partially extend this compassion to sentient beings like the animals we eat today and avoid hurting them whenever possible, since they share with us many of the characteristics that make a human being worthy of not being murdered.

I would say that, for the sake of argument, a wild boar would be more sentient than a newborn baby. Apparently babies don't even realise that they have arms until about 3 months. If we were going purely on a sentience/edibility/morality scale then it would be more ethical for us to eat babies over other adult animals.

On the whole i think that the human scale of compassion is related on how we bond to other sentient beings. An example of this is the reaction to the terrorist attacks in France. All of the developed world lit up their buildings in the colours of the French flag in solidarity and sorrow. Whereas the boko haram attacks didn't really get the same attention. Why is that? Is it because life is much cheaper over there so it doesn't really matter so much to us? Or is it because we are culturally and politically more removed from Africa and therefore less able to relate? I don't really know myself. Would someone from the west (say an Englishman), if they were forced into it, prefer to eat another english person or an african?

People die all the time, so when some Frenchmen had an OBE, I just shrugged my shoulders. Doesn't mean I applauded the terrorist or that a dead fellow person leaves me unmoved.

To answer the question: JR is just boring, unoriginal and a bad interviewer. I watched the episode where he interviewed Rick Doblin, instead of shutting up and letting the guest talk, he uttered self-centered nonsense. Not worth my time.

I’m afraid the comparison with the human baby is not entirely fair because the human baby has a life of full sentience ahead of him (and its richness might overall surpass the boar’s one), so by killing the baby you are preventing this sentient life that already exists of his rich sentient future. Also a baby indeniably already feels pain, as much as the boar

I think it has to do with the nature of empathy.

Adopting a rational objective cost-benefit analysis (that allows us to think and behave the most ethical way possible) often requires putting empathy aside.

There is a lot of empirical evidence that shows that triggering specific empathic responses in people leads them to do pretty unethical things, or to be inconsistent with their own ethical principles.



“The key to engaging empathy is what has been called “the identifiable victim effect.” As the economist Thomas Schelling, writing forty-five years ago, mordantly observed, “Let a six-year-old girl with brown hair need thousands of dollars for an operation that will prolong her life until Christmas, and the post office will be swamped with nickels and dimes to save her. But let it be reported that without a sales tax the hospital facilities of Massachusetts will deteriorate and cause a barely perceptible increase in preventable deaths—not many will drop a tear or reach for their checkbooks.”

You can see the effect in the lab. The psychologists Tehila Kogut and Ilana Ritov asked some subjects how much money they would give to help develop a drug that would save the life of one child, and asked others how much they would give to save eight children. The answers were about the same. But when Kogut and Ritov told a third group a child’s name and age, and showed her picture, the donations shot up—now there were far more to the one than to the eight. The number of victims hardly matters—there is little psychological difference between hearing about the suffering of five thousand and that of five hundred thousand.

Imagine reading that two thousand people just died in an earthquake in a remote country, and then discovering that the actual number of deaths was twenty thousand. Do you now feel ten times worse? To the extent that we can recognize the numbers as significant, it’s because of reason, not empathy. In the broader context of humanitarianism, as critics like Linda Polman have pointed out, the empathetic reflex can lead us astray. When the perpetrators of violence profit from aid—as in the “taxes” that warlords often demand from international relief agencies—they are actually given an incentive to commit further atrocities. It is similar to the practice of some parents in India who mutilate their children at birth in order to make them more effective beggars. The children’s debilities tug at our hearts, but a more dispassionate analysis of the situation is necessary if we are going to do anything meaningful to prevent them.”




http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/capstone/BloomAgainstEmpathy.pdf

Try telling that to the boar. It could be argued that the boar has a richer relationship to sentience due to it being less burdened by self reflection and intellect, therefore being more capable of living in the moment but i am actually on point with you about not eating the babies.



That's a great link you posted.



Whilst i salute your egalitarian approach to death and suffering i don't reckon that you wouldn't be moved by the identifiable victim effect that is alluded to in JustaTourists link.
In order to stay on topic if there were two dead bodies and one was that of a friend of yours and the other was Joe rogan and take into consideration for practical purposes that both bodies had the same amount of usable meat available. Seeing as you don't like Joe Rogan, which body would you be more likely to eat? I am betting that it would be Rogan because you have had less empathy for him than for your friend.

if you assimilate the body of joe rogan during a full wolf moon you gain his powers.

Joe Rogan's stand up special is now on Netflix to anyone interested. It is called,

"Joe Rogan: Triggered"