face

OF EATING OF FLESH. - Plutarch

OF EATING OF FLESH.

TRACT I.

1.You ask of me then for what reason it was that Pythagoras abstained from eating of flesh. I for my part do much admire in what humor, with what soul or reason, the first man with his mouth touched slaughter, and reached to his lips the flesh of a dead animal, and having set before people courses of ghastly corpses and ghosts, could give those parts the names of meat and victuals, that but a little before lowed, cried, moved, and saw; how his sight could endure the blood of slaughtered, flayed, and mangled bodies; how his smell could bear their scent; and how the very nastiness happened not to offend the taste, while it chewed the sores of others, and participated of the saps and juices of deadly wounds.

  • Crept the raw hides, and with a bellowing sound
  • Roared the dead limbs; the burning entrails groaned.*

This indeed is but a fiction and fancy; but the fare itself is truly monstrous and prodigious, — that a man should have a stomach to creatures while they yet bellow, and that he should be giving directions which of things yet alive and speaking is fittest to make food of, and ordering the several manners of the seasoning and dressing them and serving them up to tables. You ought rather, in my opinion, to have enquired who first began this practice, than who of late times left it off.

...Collapse )But whence is it that a certain ravenousness and frenzy drives you in these happy days to pollute yourselves with blood, since you have such an abundance of things necessary for your subsistence? Why do you belie the earth as unable to maintain you? Why do you profane the lawgiver Ceres, and shame the mild and gentle Bacchus, as not furnishing you with sufficiency? Are you not ashamed to mix tame fruits with blood and slaughter? You are indeed wont to call serpents, leopards, and lions savage creatures; but yet yourselves are defiled with blood, and come nothing behind them in cruelty. What they kill is their ordinary nourishment, but what you kill is your better fare.”

 

3. For we eat not lions and wolves by way of revenge; but we let those go, and catch the harmless and tame sort, and such as have neither stings nor teeth to bite with, and slay them;

...Collapse )

4. But we are nothing put out of countenance, either by the beauteous gayety of the colors, or by the charmingness of the musical voices, or by the rare sagacity of the intellects, or by the cleanliness and neatness of diet, or by the rare discretion and prudence of these poor unfortunate animals; but for the sake of some little mouthful of flesh, we deprive a soul of the sun and light, and of that proportion of life and time it had been born into the world to enjoy. And then we fancy that the voices it utters and screams forth to us are nothing else but certain inarticulate sounds and noises, and not the several deprecations, entreaties, and pleadings of each of them, as it were saying thus to us: “I deprecate not thy necessity (if such there be), but thy wantonness. Kill me for thy feeding, but do not take me off for thy better feeding.” O horrible cruelty! It is truly an affecting sight to see the very table of rich people laid before them, who keep them cooks and caterers to furnish them with dead corpses for their daily fare; but it is yet more affecting to see it taken away, for the mammocks left are more than that which was eaten. These therefore were slain to no purpose. Others there are, who are so sparing of what is set before them that they will not suffer it to be cut or sliced; thus abstaining from them when dead, while they would not spare them when alive.

5. Well then, we understand that that sort of men are used to say, that in eating of flesh they follow the conduct and direction of Nature. But that it is not natural to mankind to feed on flesh, we first of all demonstrate from the very shape and figure of the body. For a human body no ways resembles those that were born for ravenousness; it hath no hawk’s bill, no sharp talon, no roughness of teeth, no such strength of stomach or heat of digestion, as can be sufficient to convert or alter such heavy and fleshy fare. But even from hence, that is, from the smoothness of the tongue, and the slowness of the stomach to digest, Nature seems to disclaim all pretence to fleshy victuals.

...Collapse )</div>

And it is no easy task to pull out the hook of flesh-eating from the jaws of such as have gorged themselves with luxury and are (as it were) nailed down with it. It would indeed be a good action, if as the Egyptians draw out the stomach of a dead body, and cut it open and expose it to the sun, as the only cause of all its evil actions, so we could, by cutting out our gluttony and blood-shedding, purify and cleanse the remainder of our lives. For the stomach itself is not guilty of bloodshed, but is involuntarily polluted by our intemperance. But if this may not be, and we are ashamed by reason of custom to live unblamably, let us at least sin with discretion. Let us eat flesh; but let it be for hunger and not for wantonness. Let us kill an animal; but let us do it with sorrow and pity, and not abusing and tormenting it, as many nowadays are used to do, while some run red-hot spits through the bodies of swine, that by the tincture of the quenched iron the blood may be to that degree mortified, that it may sweeten and soften the flesh in its circulation; others jump and stamp upon the udders of sows that are ready to pig, that so they may trample into one mass, (O Piacular Jupiter!) in the very pangs of delivery, blood, milk, and the corruption of the crushed and mangled young ones, and so eat the most inflamed part of the animal; others sew up the eyes of cranes and swans, and so shut them up in darkness to be fattened, and then souse up their flesh with certain monstrous mixtures and pickles.

2. By all which it is most manifest, that it is not for nourishment, or want, or any necessity, but for mere gluttony, wantonness, and expensiveness, that they make a pleasure of villany.

...Collapse )</div>

3. And what meal is not expensive? That for which no animal is put to death. Shall we reckon a soul to be a small expense. I will not say perhaps of a mother, or a father, or of some friend, or child, as Empedocles did; but one participating of feeling, of seeing, of hearing, of imagination, and of intellection; which each animal hath received from Nature for the acquiring of what is agreeable to it, and the avoiding what is disagreeable. ...Collapse )</strong>Even so, in the beginning, some wild and mischievous beast was killed and eaten, and then some little bird or fish was entrapped. And the love of slaughter, being first experimented and exercised in these, at last passed even to the laboring ox, and the sheep that clothes us, and to the poor cock that keeps the house; until by little and little, unsatiableness being strengthened by use, men came to the slaughter of men, to bloodshed and wars. Now even if one cannot demonstrate and make out, that souls in their regenerations make a promiscuous use of all bodies, and that that which is now rational will at another time be irrational, and that again tame which is now wild, — for that Nature changes and transmutes every thing,

With different fleshy coats new clothing all, —

this thing should be sufficient to change and reclaim men, that it is a savage and intemperate habit, that it brings sickness and heaviness upon the body, and that it inclines the mind the more brutishly to bloodshed and destruction, when we have once accustomed ourselves neither to entertain a guest nor keep a wedding nor to treat our friends without blood and slaughter.

...Collapse )

7. Let us therefore in the next place consider, whether we owe any justice to the brute beasts. Neither shall we handle this point artificially, or like subtle sophisters, but by casting our eye into our own breasts, and conversing with ourselves as men, we will weigh and examine the whole matter. . . . [The remainder of the manuscript, if it was ever completed, is missing.]

[* ]Odyss. XII. 395.

[* ]“I see not how this that is included within these marks [] agreeth with this place, or matter in hand: I suppose therefore it is inserted heere without judgement, and taken out of some other booke.”—Holland.

[* ]See Mullach, Fragm. Philos. p. 325 (No. 73).

[* ]Odyss. X. 234.

[* ]Eurip. Cresphontes, Frag. 457.


http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1215&chapter=92440&layout=html&Itemid=27
face

Fishing Bird

Ok, I happen to glance at Funniest Home Videos when it was on.... there was a bird on a dock, and he hopped over to the higher level to retrieve some bread....but not for himself.... no, he hopped to a lower level where he could reach the water, dropped in the bread poking at it a little with his beak... paused, then nabbed a fish that had gone for the bread crumb. Animals amaze me.

More stories...Collapse )
face

Movies and Music

Well, when I first moved into the Glebe Area, we used to always rent from West Coast Video over the bridge in Old Ottawa South. There we could rent new releases for 4.55, and on wednesdays we were able to get 2 for 1... 2 new releases for 4.55 (for one night)! At some point there was movie dollars in cereal boxes and I can't remember it was $2 off or more than that, but I was able to use them at West Coast Video on their 2 for 1 days! So I was paying less than $2 each for a new release. But eventually I decided that my time was worth more than the bit of money I saved walking all the way to West Coast, and I started going to Alpha which was MUCH closer to me. The movies there were $5 and I got to know all the guys working there and tried to encourage them to also have some kind of deal on quantity, or discount an older movie when renting with a new release... or SOMETHING. Eventually they created a deal that from sunday to wednesday you could get 2 new releases for 2 nights for $8.... so I would ALWAYS rent 2 movies... and usually on Friday or Saturday we would rent one too. Well, they eventually cut their deal altogether, we got tv and started watching that a little more.. and now they have upped their prices to $5.75. So.... I love you guys but you are getting nowhere near the money I used to spend. Even their older movies are like $5.. but you can keep them a week (well, that's useless cause I watch them the first night so to me they cost the same as a new release). I started buying more DVDs there (for family Christmas) because there is a deal when you buy 3 you pay $10 for each (West Coast charges $10 even if you buy only one though).

Anyway, so what am I doing now?? I've signed up for http://www.zip.ca (like netflix) and it's great! They have so much selection, and basically anything that is sold on DVD can be found there (although I am unhappy that more shows haven't been released on DVD... like Supernanny, and the other seasons of the Apprentice besides the first). I've watched things I never would have otherwise rented... such as "Cirque Du Soleil" and "Yamakasi". Yamakasi: I first heard about this movie when "Ripley's Believe it or Not" mentioned these guys in Paris who invented an extreme sport, Parkour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkour), and that they even were in a movie. It's really too bad that the movie was only in french with no subtitles, because I couldn't understand a thing. I fastforward the talking/drama bits, and enjoyed the action/sport a lot. I've also discovered tv shows like Quantum Leap which I never heard of before.. and will be renting some of my old tv favorites: Sliders and Pretender.

Another website that is cool is http://www.pandora.com. You plug in a song or artist that you like, and then they play other artist/songs that they think sound somewhat similar and you might like. I plugged in Bond (artist) and have free music I've never heard that is a style I like.
face

Go Clean and Green

I am so excited by the emerging green technologies around the world, and would like to see Canada take a progressive and active part in these technologies by implementing suitable green alternatives to nuclear here in Ontario.

Let Ontario know! http://www.gocleanandgreen.org ... you can just use their letter, add a personal note if you like.. put in your address and e-mail.... simple!
Read more...Collapse )
face

The car of the future will run on metal.

So reckons Dave Beach, a researcher at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, who has come up with a plan to transform the way we fuel our engines. Chunks of metal such as iron, aluminium or boron are the thing, he believes. Turn them into powder with grains just nanometres across and the stuff becomes highly reactive. Ignite it, and it releases copious quantities of energy. With a modified engine and a tankful of metal, Beach calculates that an average saloon car could travel three times as far as the equivalent petrol-powered vehicle. Better still, because of the way that this metal nano-fuel burns, it is almost completely non-polluting. That means no carbon dioxide, no dust, no soot and no nitrogen oxides. What's more, this fuel is fully rechargeable: treat your spent nanoparticles with a little hydrogen and the stuff can be burnt again and again. It could spell the start of a new iron age, and not just for cars. All kinds of engines, from domestic heating units to the turbines in power stations, could be adapted to burn metal.

.....

At the very least, metal-burning engines are another entry in the list of alternatives to oil. And whatever happens, Beach's remarkable idea does raise one interesting possibility. In the past, energy magnates have earned billions from coal, oil and gas fields. In the future, they could grow rich from scrapyards full of yesterday's cars, by transforming them into fuel for the vehicles of tomorrow.

The rest of the article here: http://www.mng.org.uk/green_house/renewable_energy/metal_NS_article.htm
face

Enviromission

Ok, If you want to hear about an "insane" green energy project.... I say insane because it sounds unbelievable.... to be built in Australia.
Here are some notes:
- It's been a while since I saw Sahara, but it reminded me of the solar plant in that movie.
- tower in center is 1 km high... more than twice as tall as the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpar, and visible from 80 kilometres away. (wiki says it may now be shorter)
- the surrounding base of about 3.5 km diameter doubles as a greenhouse

If you have high-speed internet: http://www.enviromission.com.au/project/video/video.htm
Otherwise http://www.enviromission.com.au
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_chimney
and of course google turns up lots of articles/news pieces as well.

face

Cottage...

My work is buying a cottage somewhere and they are letting everyone take vacations there... as a taxable benefit, so we just have to cover those taxes. The unfortunate thing is I don't have a car, so figuring out how to get there and take advantage of it will be a bit of a pain... also, missing work/pay? Anyway, it's cool... I haven't seen the place, but I heard it was pretty nice.