Q&A: vegan-ism in a non modern world?
Question by kuwaizair: vegan-ism in a non modern world?
I had asked this in the Vegitaeran area of food, on TA.
I would now like to see, what the Anthroplogists, historians and other scientists say
In bickering on line. in the topic of living a a life without causing pain to animals, there are some that are trying to lead people to beleive, “there is never, ever an excuse not to be, everyone, everywhere, at any time could be one. but culture is not advanced enough to teach people it’s wrong to torture and murder animals for human life”
these folk also get offended when I suggest/ask that some are taking their era for granted.
which brings me back to this.
would a person be able to be vegan, before any of today’s luxery? by vegan, I mean the whole “use nothing from an animal”
they tell me it is, it is possible to had lived in Ireland, during the middle ages.
and that the Chinese have had vegans for thousands of years.
but, what I want, is to see how it could be possible.
I find it hard to beleive, living in an area with long, cold snowy winters can house vegans.
or am I wrong?
how would/could/did they live?
given the fact that there was little trade, resulting in “no tofu for the Vikings heading across the sea”
and no synthetic fibers for Druids.
I don’t want to be reminded of Monks who tried hard to not eat animals.
I want people who did not use whale oil, lard soap, wool, honey, pouches made of stomach and not gourd, leather boots, fur hats, bone charcoal,silk, everything.
it sounds like it’s impossible. but they said it was, and those folks would of been healthier, and because a veggie diet today is affordable, poor people could do it. But then someone else told me only wealthy folk, or Kings could of lived a meatless diet
but I’m told I’m wrong. what do you say? do you have links to prove me wrong?
or should I be mean and, the next time it comes up, tell them that it was impossible back then, unless you lived in a tropical climate.
Best answer:
Answer by Jonathan Alexander
It’s a luxury to most but a necessary choice for some.
There is no evidence vegan is a good way of life of the 20 or so people who have lived to 100 this century only 2 were loosely vegetarian – not vegans.
But no vegan can deny that the human digestive system does not contain cellulase so we cannot digest, as herbivore animals can, plant materials effectively. Also human teeth are omnivorous not vegetarian.
The “vegan way” is not scientifically proven and is little more than a marketing and money making gimmick.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
Inuit diets are mostly meat, partly because vegetation is hard to find in a cold climate, and partly because the high energy content of meat is necessary to keep warm. People in colder climates burn a lot more calories.
Jared Diamond says though that in his experience (he has spent many years of his life with the tribes of Papua New Guinea) with ‘primitive’ peoples who we usually see as great hunters, and we think of primitive man in general as being great hunters, when questioned, their diet consists of mostly vegetation and some small animals. The great hunter bringing down large mammals is mostly a myth, he says.
You are right, modern society makes veganism possible, and there are many societies throughout history where it would be impossible to be vegan. When early humans first migrated north from Africa, they were moving into a colder climate with less abundant plant resources. That would have been impossible without eating meat (for its availability as well as its high fat and protein content) and wearing clothes made from animal products. Synthetic fibers, and even plant-based materials like cotton, are relatively recent in the grand scheme of human history. Wearing wool, furs, leather, etc was a necessity for most of the people who have ever lived on Earth. In Ireland during the Middle Ages, people herded animals, used animal products and wore wool– it would not occur to someone to avoid anything connected to an animal, and it would have been very hard to survive. In most agrarian societies, meat is fairly scarce and expensive, so people’s diet is mostly vegetarian, but without modern technology animal-derived products remain an essential part of life. In tropical habitats, it could have been possible for people to live an entirely vegan lifestyle– if you have a lot of edible plants and less need of clothing you can do it, but again, it would not have occurred to those people.
The underlying issue is one of morality. Moral beliefs are subjective– modern conveniences give us the luxury to say that exploiting animals is wrong, but what gives us the right to say that everyone worldwide, in every culture and time period, should have the same belief? Who are we to say that its OK for a hunter-gatherer to pick fruit from a tree, but wrong for him to take honey from a hive? Cultures and lifeways are based on adapting to environments, using what is in the environment to survive. The idea that animals are off-limits is a wholly modern notion. Even looking at the history of Hindus and other groups that consider animals sacred or are vegetarian for religious reasons, I don’t know of any evidence that anyone practiced or advocated veganism before modern times. It was often impossible, always impractical, and would have made no sense to people’s worldview.
The mainstream view among anthropologists is that the increases in human brain-size occurred well before the advent of cooking, due to a shift away from the consumption of nuts and berries to the consumption of meat.
Changes to diet.
Because of the indigestible components of plants such as raw cellulose and starch, certain parts of the plant such as stems, mature leaves, enlarged roots, and tubers would not have been part of the hominid diet prior to the advent of fire. Instead, the consumption of plants would be limited to parts that were made of simpler sugars and carbohydrates such as seeds, flowers, and fleshy fruits. The incorporation of toxins into the seeds and similar carbohydrate sources also affected the diet, as cyanogenic glycosides such as those found in linseed, cassava, and manioc are made non-toxic through cooking. The teeth of H. erectus and the wear on the teeth reflect the consumption of foods such as tough meats and crisp root vegetables.
Early Humans and the Advantages of Eating Meat.
The cooking of meat, as evident from burned and blackened mammal bones, makes the meats easier to eat and easier to attain the nutrition from proteins by making the meat itself easier to digest. The amount of energy needed to digest cooked meat is less than raw meat, and cooking gelatinizes collagen and other connective tissues as well, “opens up tightly woven carbohydrate molecules for easier absorption.” Cooking also kills parasites and food poisoning bacteria.
scientific evidence all indicates that we are omnivores, i.e., we can survive on a wide variety of plant and animal foods. It also used to be believed that the great apes were all frugivores (fruit-eaters), but recent reseach shows that chimpanzees at least will attack and kill small animals and will eat carrion if they find it. The chimpanzee is thought to be our closest animal relative.
The extreme opposite concept, however, that of Man the Great Hunter, also seems to be untrue. In his book The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee, Jared Diamond describes how he was invited on a hunt by a tribe in New Guinea who had retained Stone Age technology and habits of thought in the 20th century. The day’s total bag was two baby birds, a few frogs, and a lot of mushrooms. Although the men of the tribe frequently boasted of the large animals they had killed, when pressed for details, they admitted that large animals were killed only a few times in a hunter’s career. These peoples’ stone tools were far more advanced than the stone tools found on prehistoric sites, so Professor Diamond thinks it unlikely that prehistoric hunters could have enjoyed a much higher success rate than present day hunter-gatherer tribes. It seems more likely that early humans ate carrion, small prey like baby birds, and a lot of plant foods.
He cites a notable exception to this rule. The first humans to colonise a previously unoccupied island or continent, e.g., Madagascar, New Zealand, and America, found animals so tame that they didn’t run away from hunters. In these instances, something like 80 percent of the large birds and mammal species of such an area were exterminated in a relatively short time.
1st of all, whether it’s possible to do so and whether our ancestors actually did it are 2 completely different issues.
2nd of all, of course it would be possible, especially if u allow the use of animals that die of natural causes, u can still get plenty of leather, bone, sinew, etc…
Pretty much everyone here has given you your answer. I just wanted to add in regards to monks. I’m assuming you are referring to Buddhist monks and such since that is the popular belief, but even in that instance it is false. Most sects of buddhism actually do consume meat. Even the chan buddhists which are some of the most vegetarian of the line at times consumed meat for ceremonial purposes as outlined in Shahar’s work.