11 Replies to “Dawkins Advocates Overcoming the Cannibalism Taboo

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    Too funny! The “stubborn moralist” Richard Dawkins,,,,

    Richard Dawkins on the Moral Argument for God: by William Lane Craig
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-OjSKr79aQ

    ,,, advocates cannibalism.

    Dr. Hannibal Lecter: Whenever feasible, one should always try to eat the rude.
    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/silence_of_the_lambs/quotes/

    ”Soylent Green Is People”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zAFA-hamZ0

    Just goes to show that the subjective morality of an atheist, that he seeks to replace God with, is no morality at all.

  2. 2
    LocalMinimum says:

    First order consequentialist declaring any of higher degree an absolutist, much like the cartoon caveman with only one word to describe non-singular quantities.

  3. 3
    Seversky says:

    To ‘un-spin’ this a little, the original story was about a company which is claiming success in growing “clean meat”. In this case “clean meat” refers to meat grown in the laboratory from stem cells harvested from cattle.

    One advantage of “clean meat” is that it undermines moral objections against eating meat that, until now, could only come from butchered animals.

    Dawkins was speculating about growing meat in the same way from human stem cells and wondering if we could overcome the strong taboo against cannibalism. He wasn’t advocating that we all become Hannibal Lecters.

    Actually, the first thing that popped into my mind when I read that was “Chicken Little!”.

    For those who don’t get the reference, it comes from a science-fiction novel called The Space Merchants by C M Kornbluth and Frederick Pohl and published in 1953.

    The book is a social and political satire on a near future world that is run by giant trans-national corporations and powerful advertising agencies. Governments have been reduced to ceremonial pawns of these corporations.

    At one point, the ‘hero’, who works for one of the ad agencies is kidnapped by mercenaries in the employ of a rival agency, stripped of his identity and sent as a slave laborer to a facility which grows Chicken Little. This is a huge blob of chicken breast tissue which is constantly growing in a nutrient medium. The workers are continuously slicing meat from the outer surface of this thing which is sent to be packaged and processed for sale to a world which is desperately short of basic resources like food.

    Chicken Little is nearly here.

  4. 4
    Barry Arrington says:

    To unspin Sev’s shameless attempt at spinning what Dawkins said, here are his exact words:

    What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism? An interesting test case for consequentialist morality versus “yuck reaction” absolutism.

    The only fair interpretation is that he favors the consequentialist resolution of the question (eat human meat) and mocks any moral objection against his view as ‘”yuck reaction’ absolutism.”

    There is no question about Dawkins’ views. The only real question is why Sev would try to distort them.

  5. 5
    ET says:

    We don’t need meat at all so why even bother? It is a waste of land and resources. So again I ask why even bother?

  6. 6
    LocalMinimum says:

    ET @ 5:

    I will agree with your statement as long as you allow for dairy and eggs. Animal protein is necessary for anyone who cannot adopt the full-on gnoshing lifestyle that is Veganism, or who works at an industry where their body is damaged beyond the ability of their single stomach to provide necessary structural nutrition.

    Having had jobs that do both simultaneously, and fighting to maintain muscle mass even on a steady diet of skim milk and needing to perform a Yoga routine to be able to take a shower at the end of the day, I’m not impressed by twiggy long distance running YouTubers declaring the viability of “athletic veganism”. The manual element of the logistics of healthcare would crush that guy.

  7. 7
    ET says:

    Silk makes a high protein nut milk that I really like. But I admit that I do eat eggs, cheeses, butter, the occasional bowl of ice cream and sometimes fish/ seafood. No land/ air animals.

    I tried changing out the butter with coconut oil but that didn’t go well for me.

    I swim 3+ miles a week- 6′ 225lbs (50-36-36)

  8. 8
    LocalMinimum says:

    ET @ 7:

    Well, eggs and dairy are the highest quality of protein. I hear hemp is the highest quality vegetable protein; comes right under skinless chicken breasts.

    What I hear the biggest issue is is amino acid shortages, primarily lysine. I’ve heard you can’t eat enough vegetation to get what you need under hard, sustained labor.

    You really don’t need that much animal stuff to make the difference, no where near what First Worlders eat, and I’m totally behind reducing the consumption of animal products, especially animals themselves. You just have to remain forever vigilant against Vegan fanaticism :p

  9. 9
    ET says:

    Well, eggs and dairy are the highest quality of protein.

    What about whey?

    I hear hemp is the highest quality vegetable protein

    What about soybeans, legumes and chickpeas?

    I started out as a veggie back in 1979. I started eating seafood again when I moved back to New England but even then it was occasional. Dairy is OK as long as the animals are not abused.

    I actually stopped eating eggs in 1979 because I was naïve and didn’t understand they are not yet embryos. Then I met a chicken farmer.

  10. 10
    Seversky says:

    Barry Arrington @ 4

    To unspin Sev’s shameless attempt at spinning what Dawkins said, here are his exact words:

    What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism? An interesting test case for consequentialist morality versus “yuck reaction” absolutism.

    The only fair interpretation is that he favors the consequentialist resolution of the question (eat human meat) and mocks any moral objection against his view as ‘”yuck reaction’ absolutism.”

    Yes, he favors a consequentialist morality but he doesn’t advocate for cannibalism. He speculates – “What if…”, “Could we…” – but at no point does he actually urge people to take up cannibalism.

    He actually makes the same point in a Guardian feature about him in 2015.

    Sitting in the Enthoven room in New College, Dawkins characterised his own mode of argument – and the controversies that invariably ensue – as guided by the techniques of moral philosophy: “Moral philosophers say things like, ‘What is actually wrong with cannibalism?’ There are two ways of responding to that: one is to shrink back in horror and say, ‘Cannibalism! Cannibalism! We can’t talk about cannibalism!’ The other is to say, ‘Well, actually, what is wrong with cannibalism?’ Then you work it out and you tease it out and you decide yes, actually, cannibalism is wrong, but for the following reasons. So I’d like to think that my moral values at least partly come from reasoning. Trying to suppress the gut reaction as much as possible.”

  11. 11
    ET says:

    And what reasons did Dawkins ever provide for not eating humans? If Dawkins is right about our origins then there aren’t any reasons not to partake in human consumption.

Leave a Reply