RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 20 Feb 1999 09:12:40 -1000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (94 lines)
Nieft / Secola wrote:
>
> Huh?!? Are you saying that if we eat the diet we are adapted to we will go
> extinct? I am completely awed that you can make that sound plausible in
> three sentences. Perhaps because life extension and level of energy (beyond
> a certain point) have little to do with evolutionary success.

no i am saying that it seems to me as animals and plants evolve or adapt to
new situations or environments they may change their patterns of eating and/or
lifestyle. the degree of succcess they have at this may be a factor in how
well they survive in an everchanging nature. some may, due to one reason or
another fail to adapt and go extinct. it seems that our species has evolved
the ability to both instinctively and intellectually examine and refine the
quality and quantity of our life. it seems logical and natural that this would
go on and on. when some of us see the destruction by humans of nature in all
it's complex parts, we are compelled by some instinctive(spiritual?) urge to
survive. i think it's good to go back to point A (as you and others have done
with stone age instincto diets) and find where we may have taken a limited
course in our dietary evolution, but i just don't see it as the final
perfection of our species, if it were we would still be in the stone age it
seems to me.
>
> Huh?!? Here's one scenerio for the future evolution of our species: Raw
> vegan advocates convince the world that they must become strict converts
> for health, and of course, spiritual reasons. Immediately libido is
> diminished to absurdly low levels. The next generation, not just limited in
> number but also showing a marked inability to grow to sexual maturity,
> reproduces at a miserable rate. And so on, the species is extinct in
> several generations.

here's another scenario. stone age diet advocates convince the world that
compassion for other life forms and spirituality are not worthy of any
attention and that raw meat eating is the accepted norm. immediately libido,
competition, and agression are increased to absurdly high levels and there is
a big jump in population of humans. this increase in population creates tribal
disputes over hunting ranges. because there is little compassion for any other
life except perhaps the immediate clan or tribe, these clans begin to fight
and kill each other. each generation, in an effort to survive develops better
and better ways of killing food animals and their competing neighbor clans.
this leads to a male dominant intelligence based on power and greed and
advanced weaponry and so on, the species is extinct in several generations.
>
> Seriously, forest, for fun, try entertaining, just for a moment, the idea
> that spirituality has no place in the human future, that our "destiny" is
> to outgrow our pathetic need to codify bliss. It is of no interest to me
> how true or false that may turn out to be--it is simply a way for you,
> perhaps, to see how prejudiced you are _for_ all the spiritual hocus pocus.
> What if the eggs in your basket (your group process thing, raw veg, and
> general new agey spirity stuff) are not the "true direction" but another
> fad? Again, whether or not they are the future makes no difference to me.
> My point is: who decided that what _you_ believe is best for the rest?

seriously, kirt, try entertaining, just for a moment, the idea that
instinctual spirituality is evolving and has some place in the human future
and past, that it is our destiny to refine body, mind, and spirit to explore a
more harmonious compassionate blissful experience with nature so that as
humans we do not continue to destroy nature and each other.  perhaps to go
back to the past to solve the problems of the future and the now may have
limitations. i certainly see some value in your investigation of past
evolutionary stages and have done a lot of the same. in answer to your
question at end of paragraph above, no one decided what i believe is best for
the rest, it's just a series of ideas and concepts that seem to me will make
my life and world a more fun, relaxing, loving  place to be. i am open to the
refinement of these concepts by the concensus of the family members that may
find agreement with the general outline. i would never impose ideas on others,
just share what has work/played for me in my limited experience of life so far
and hope that together with group consensus we will make wiser decisions than
by the traditional male dominant competative hierarchical monarchy,
dictatorship, or majority rule approach.

ps. it's possible that the lowering of libido does not diminish our ability to
enjoy sex and sensuality but actually allows us a chance to have a more
"whole"istic relaxed compassionate, body, mind, spirit, experience with the
oppisite sex instead of the (in my mind limited) male dominant traditional
stone age macho sexual mentallity. it's possible that this lowering of libido
also reduces male agreesion and competition with other males and enables them
to evolve from agressive competition to relaxed blissful cooperation and
increases the chance for individual and world peace. i know it's hard to
believe this spiritual stuff without faith and experience and experiments. as
a youth growing up i rejected the old male dominant macho high priest control
type religions (like the stone age ones that used animal and human sacrifice).
i explored them and found them very limiting, but my spiritual instincts kept
urging me on to explore a deeper more evolved compassionate way of interacting
with nature and fellow people. faith is a weird thing, i know i cannot
convince anyone of it's paradoxical value, it must be experienced to be
appreciated. my limited experience with spiritual faith has resulted in
several psychic events in my life and numerous sychronistic phenomena, enough
for me to have few doubts about it's validity but not enough to prove to you
that it is real. i care enough about you and the rest of the human race to
share it, you may reject it if you like. i would never expect anyone to accept
spirit on blind faith but by trial and error testing and experimenting and
experiencing on their own.......aloha and peace forest
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2