VeggieBoards banner

So what do you think about animals in the wild eating other animals?

2K views 26 replies 12 participants last post by  Enthios 
#1 · (Edited)
I have always wondered what vegans/vegetarians thought about other animals eating animals for food? If natural habitats weren't being destroyed do you think it would change anything? Do you think it is more understandable for other animals to eat flesh? Sorry this has probably been discussed many times here, but I am curious to know people's thoughts on this.
 
#4 ·
A very sound point!

The massive or even small scale containment and slaughter of animals is not needed to further our species. They can be substituted in the agricultural system by purely green manures, check out veganic permaculture and farming.

On the level of nutrition on both in large ( epidemiology) and small (biochemistry) investigations overall positives have been found from subsisting on plant foods. Predastors, or organisms living at larger trophic levels, not only can be parasites, like was pointed out by another poster, but get parasites and all the other toxic substances that accumulate up the food chain.

But I do oppose the idea that they should be eliminated from natural environments as they fill a biological niche that will inevitably be filled. You can see many examples of this in island selection, when a species becomes isolated on an island then rapidly evolves diversifying to fill available niches even filling certain predatory roles (i.e. the Tasmanian tiger a top predatory marsupial in Australia). I just believe that we have no place filling this role.
 
#3 · (Edited)
I have always wondered what vegans/vegetarians thought about other animals eating animals for food?
In the natural order of things, at least as can be observed on this lone planet, I think herbivores are the more successful species- always have been, and always will be. Predators historically have submissive roles. They are essentially parasites, who depend on the success of other species for their survival, which ultimately condemns them, as concerns the Animal Kingdom, to failure and a dead-end, evolutionary-wise. It's hard to imagine a world dominated by predators. To me, as a human, success of a species means, attaining the ability to supersede nature, and even to improve on it- to correct its mistakes- to the point of being able to embrace other species, beyond our own, and care for them. Should this include predators? Good question. Nature seems to understand that carnivorous animal behavior (including humans) is too expensive to be sustained in perpetuity.
This is why I think humans must learn to curb their own carnivorous appetites, for the betterment of the most.

If natural habitats weren't being destroyed do you think it would change anything?
Hypothetical questions are difficult to answer. Also, I think this question is bound up with the question of human population control, something that will be of ever-increasing concern to future generations- and the animals we live with. One of the oldest surviving species is the shark, but sharks have yet had to deal in any serious way with the encroachment of man. Someday, we may be cultivating the ocean floor, possibly be building cities there. How will this affect sharks' abilities to function and survive? Are predators necessary for a world to flourish? Some say yes, but I know of no evidence for this, except from a past that may no longer be relevant. I'll just say, before mankind addresses the behavior of others, he needs to correct his own. Nature may yet be able to strike a balance between its animals (including carnivores) and a human race that has learned a critical lesson: that eating flesh is work for janitors.

Do you think it is more understandable for other animals to eat flesh?
Of course. They act from instinct, and have no choice. It's perfectly understandable.

Sorry this has probably been discussed many times here, but I am curious to know people's thoughts on this.
I've been a member here almost 10-years, and this is the first time I've seen this subject. Thanks for bringing it up, willow. :up:
 
#5 ·
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. The saying it's a "dog eat dog world" holds a lot of symbolism. Whether it's an animal in the wild killing another animal or humans doing whatever it takes to survive. It's all relevant. I believe that we, the people, created this "dog eat dog" world over many centuries through our will/beliefs . Our established belief system manifests itself in our everyday lives and is reflected through the animal kingdom. But does it really have to be this way? Shouldn't all creatures evolve at some point? I would like to think that a change in our core beliefs and choosing to live in accordance with the universe is the way to change. I believe the universe is there waiting to give us a helping hand if we are willing to make those changes. And yes, i believe the universe can throw us some creative solutions and miracles that would never be available to us otherwise if we are willing to change. That is why making small changes like choosing not to eat meat is actually a big deal IMO. When you say no to eating meat you are saying you will not support hurting other creatures, you are saying you will not support slavery, you are saying you will not support a cannibalistic world, etc ... I know this is all very idealist, but I have spent a lot of time thinking about this and right now I feel very strongly about this philosophy.
 
#6 ·
Capstan
That doggie in the window
Quote:
Sorry this has probably been discussed many times here, but I am curious to know people's thoughts on this.
I've been a member here almost 10-years, and this is the first time I've seen this subject. Thanks for bringing it up, willow.


I am surprised no one has ever asked this. Thanks for being cool about me asking about this. :)
 
#7 ·
Non-human animals eating animals is completely different from humans eating animals. I have no problem with animals eating other animals. Cats, snakes, sharks, etc. have evolved (or were created - pick your favorite) to survive and thrive in life by eating other animals. It is what they need to do, and for them it is completely natural. Humans raising animals by the billions, stuffing them tiny enclosures, breeding them to be unable to support their own weight, and countless other things we do are completely unnecessary, and definitely unnatural.
 
#10 · (Edited)
evolution is a natural thing.....something that works survives, and something that doesn' doesn't survive....loop that around, and you get evolution, and I'm sure it is at all levels of reality, but the thing with this fallen universe is you have planets with limited resources, so lifeforms have to compete, which means that you get biological niches for predators, which some herbivore will evolve to fill......in paradise creature have all they need without having to compete, so no niche for predators...I think.:)
 
#13 ·
My question is, can the evolution of technology (man) make this world- or return it to- something like that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: whispering willow
#14 ·
Plant propagation is the answer to vegetarian destruction to ecological food supply and a need for carnivorous violence. The changes are slow to take place, and though a more vegetarian world may develop in time, there will probably still be future overpopulation consequences to deal with. Other types of methodical controls imposed. A way to world peace requires strong adherence to ideals and morals that are not fun nor easy, but hard work and who really takes life that seriously? not many.
Isn't it weird that our favorite pets, dogs and cats, are inherent by nature or heritage basically rampaging terrorizing murderers? How can it be that they are so likable with such a nature? They must really serve a true purpose.
 
#16 ·
I think animals eating animals is natural. Every animal has a specific set of nutritional requirements, including humans. If eating meat is the healthiest diet, they are eating what they are supposed to be eating. Some carnivores, such as snakes, can go up to a year without food, which is longer than the wait for a good season for grass in some areas, particularly the desert. I believe carnivores are more efficient eaters because they evolved to be. They rely on the animal they are eating to provide nutrition instead of trying to process and reprocess plants as seen in rabbits and cows.

Mother nature knows what she is doing :)

If we are at the point where we can decide how to consume our food to properly nourish our bodies, that is an amazing evolutionary feat. if it is healthier to not eat meat, we can decide to do that. If our morals push us to exclude what used to be a major part of out diet as humans, that too is incredible. It sets us apart from animals.

That's why I don't hold animals to the same standard.
 
#20 ·
Although I think it is healthier without meat, I don't think humans lived a mainly plant diet as we were evolving. It was when food was scarce and we had to hunt and go long periods without food. We didn't have a mostly plant diet until agriculture. Today most humans have a mostly plant diet (grains and processed plants about 50-60% of the diet) with meat around 25%.

I think it is largely debated though. It also probably depends on where the humans lived back then or today. What matters is that we can make food choices for ourselves that can be healthy pretty much year round.
 
#21 ·
Although I think it is healthier without meat, I don't think humans lived a mainly plant diet as we were evolving. It was when food was scarce and we had to hunt and go long periods without food.
Humans have only been around for 200,000 years but our evolutionary history goes back many millions of years. Around 1~2 million years ago our ancestors started to include more meat in their diet but before then our ancestors diet, like our close relatives the chimp and gorilla, were almost entirely plants. If you look in the mirror you'll notice that you don't have a single adaptation for hunting, beyond insects and the occasional small animal our ancestors could not have reliably obtained meat until fairly advanced tools were discovered. Due to this history we have the biological machinery to subsist on plant-based diets and are actually pretty poorly adapted for meat heavy diets.

Obtaining plant foods is actually more reliably than animal foods, many plant foods are available year around and humans are uniquely adapted to obtain some plant foods that many other animals couldn't eat (e.g., tubers). By looking at modern humans in tribal, etc societies we have a good idea about how efficient hunting vs foraging is and for most human groups (exception being those in extreme northern climates) foraging yields more calories per effort than hunting. And these groups are human, our past ancestors had much worse tools which would have made meat even less efficient.

In any case, it would be a strange coincidence if minimizing meat was the most healthy for us if our evolutionary history was one of primarily eating meat. And, as I tried to say before, we can't make food choices ourselves. What we can and cannot eat has been determined by our evolutionary history. For example, we are very efficient at digesting starches while we can't digest cellulose at all. We can eat a pretty impressive list of plants, many of which are toxic to some other animals.
 
#22 ·
I thought we had a digestive system much closer to a carnivore than a herbivore. We also don't regurgitate and rechew food to gain nutrients, eat our feces to redigest nutrients, or graze 24/7 like most herbivores.

So that tells me that we have evolved to eat meat, but we are at the stage of technology where we can choose to supplement our diet to choose not to eat meat.
 
#23 ·
I thought we had a digestive system much closer to a carnivore than a herbivore. We also don't regurgitate and rechew food to gain nutrients, eat our feces to redigest nutrients, or graze 24/7 like most herbivores.
Not all herbivores are ruminants, for example, rabbits and horses have monogastric digestive systems like us and are herbivores. Our digestive system differs in significant ways from a carnivore and is very similar to our closet relatives, the gorilla and chimp, who eat diets that are almost entirely plant based.

Meat eating is, evolutionary speaking, a pretty recent event in our evolution which is likely why meat-free diets have been shown to have such a positive impact on our health.

So that tells me that we have evolved to eat meat, but we are at the stage of technology where we can choose to supplement our diet to choose not to eat meat.
If we evolved to eat meat we would have clear adaptations for eating meat, but we don't. We have no physiological adaptations for hunting, our teeth are terrible at chewing meat (which is why people cook it/process it), our esophagus is too small to shallow flesh, etc. Our physiology is clearly oriented around plant-based diets and as such meat could not have been consumed, and wasn't consumed, until our ancestors developed fairly advanced tools that allowed them to hunt, cut, cook, etc mammals. That is, our ancestors became opportunistic meat eaters once they developed tools that overcame our plant oriented physiology but this doesn't mean they were well adapted to eating meat.
 
#24 ·
The time in which they built tools to eat meat was around 2 million years ago (I think). That doesn't seem so recent to me. But I guess I will agree to disagree with you on this. I feel we did evolve to include meat in our diets and we are able to live without meat now. I don't know if it matters, but I consider our start to be **** erectus, which would be after our split with apes and chimps. I have a hard time trying to compare us to chimps and apes since our physiology has changed so much over such a long period of time from then.

I'll leave it at that though :) I just wanted to make it clear what I was talking about. I don't feel like arguing about meat. I don't think it's really relevant to modern humans.
 
#25 ·
The time in which they built tools to eat meat was around 2 million years ago (I think). That doesn't seem so recent to me.
The tools created by our ancestors 2 million years ago were pretty basic and not advanced enough to efficiently hunt...at best they would have allowed them to cut some pieces off a carcass, extract bone marrow, etc. But 2 million years is very recent evolutionary speaking and before our recent ancestors started to opportunistically eat meat they were eating, like other apes, a diet that was almost entirely plant based.

All mammals can digest animal protein, even cows, so we didn't need to evolve to eat meat......we would need to evolve to eat meat and maintain health and that didn't seem to happen. Perhaps because some anthropologists are wrong about how much meat our ancestors ate (there isn't agreement on this) or perhaps people tended to die too young for the consequences to manifest. But now that people are living much longer, heavy meat consumption comes with heavy health consequences and that isn't what you'd expect from an animal that was adapted for meat consumption.

Our ancestors split from chimps much before **** Erectus, **** Erectus lived between 1~2 million years ago where as the split with chimps occurred 5~6 million years ago. Humans are apes and our physiologically similar to other apes, the big physiological differences being our pelvic structure (to support talking bipedal locomotion) and our skulls/brain size. I don't know, I think other apes look a lot like humans:



All apes have similar digestive systems, the big differences between ours and the other apes is that our digestive is more oriented towards calorie dense foods.
 
#26 ·
my thought on this, always been, animals r animals, we don't hav to b like them.

also, animals eating animals might b a natural thing but doesn't mean they're right. they might b forced by circumstances like scarcity of foods but killing life for food is a very nasty job. we hav choices n we're above that. we dont hav to b so difficult. just cultivate some plants, eat a wide variety of fruits, seeds even flowers. cool. no bloody smell, no risk, no adrenaline rush, no cuts n bruises or anything. we're humans. we can do much better.

also in my thought, i believe animals need our help. peace
 
#27 ·
Murdering for food is desperation, gross and stems from a tormented mind. It is so strange to think that humans that think they are intelligent do it. And unless we were born vegetarian we were born so horribly inclined, like hey, have to admit to such fault.
We are primitive entities, like still animals. Don't let them confuse you otherwise.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top