Would you eat a chimpanzee?

[Subduction Zone]

No, because that is how we got HIV/AIDS.

Probably from cooking it, not eating it Have you ever cut yourself while cooking? I have. If one did and was not careful when handling "bush meat" one could get an infection from it.

Once cooked it was probably safe. Even if a virus survived it would still need an open wound to enter the system.

 

[Soandso]

Probably from cooking it, not eating it Have you ever cut yourself while cooking? I have. If one did and was not careful when handling "bush meat" one could get an infection from it.

Once cooked it was probably safe. Even if a virus survived it would still need an open wound to enter the system.

Depends at what temp the meat gets heated to and what temp is needed to kill the potential foodborne illness. Some people like their meat "rare"

 

[Windwalker]

Actually I don't really care about the consumption of meat as long as people treat that animal respectfully. I was raised with hunting, so it is what it is. That said, I see nothing wrong with a vegetarian lifestyle and have done so when dating to make life easier, especially since I like to cook

All that said, I guess I wonder more why we tend to humanize things. If anything this seems partly cultural, as many people would never dream of eating monkeys or dogs, but there are some cultures that actively do. I'm not sure of squeemishness or softheartedness is entirely to blame

Here's my thoughts on this. I think this has more to do with how wide our spheres of inclusiveness extend, or how narrow they are. Back to evolution again, in the view of developmental theory, if you look at how we as humans develop our sphere of those included as extensions of ourselves, begins in childhood with one's parents and one's immediate family members. In time it extends to include one's peers and friends. In time it becomes one's community or group membership. Eventually, that may extend to one's ethnic group.

Then beyond that to one's nation through national identify. Beyond this, it may evolve to include the global community of all humans, outside ethnic and national boundaries. And then beyond this, it may evolve to include all life beyond human life. And beyond this it may extend to include the entire cosmos and all life everywhere in its potentials as yet unencountered directly. One's center of identity moves from family, to the entire cosmos.

So to answer the question, the larger that circle of what is included versus excluded with what we identify ourselves with, and have empathy and a conscious connection with, will determine how we see and interact and treat life forms other than our own. Many have no problem just smashing that insect as if it were nothing at all. Others would consider that to be an unjustifiable aggression against life, with utter disregard for its beauty and miracle of existence. It shows that they see only themselves as valuable, and don't see anything else that isn't them as worth consideration. That is a matter of levels of awareness itself.

I find myself able to connect with all life at the spiritual level, yet at the same time I recognize the practicality of the natural systems we live in, as mentioned about the co-evolution of humans and livestock (not the industrialization of it). I see it as literally being that "stewards of the garden", to borrow that metaphor. It is a moral and spiritual responsibility we have. I do not believe in killing for sport, "Yeah, I got him square between the eyes!" But I do recognize killing for food. That can be done from a place of respect and regard for the life that gave itself for you. It's not "nothing" to kill an animal.

So balance is the way of life. It's yin and yang, not "Yang baby! Crush that ant hard!". Nor is in all yin, when you are like the Jain who walk five feet per hour in order to not kill any insects that might be on the ground. Both are extreme imbalances. Favor the yin, but utilize the yang when necessary.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If not for disease yes.

 

[Soandso]

Here's my thoughts on this. I think this has more to do with how wide our spheres of inclusiveness extend, or how narrow they are. Back to evolution again, in the view of developmental theory, if you look at how we as humans develop our sphere of those included as extensions of ourselves, begins in childhood with one's parents and one's immediate family members. In time it extends to include one's peers and friends. In time it becomes one's community or group membership. Eventually, that may extend to one's ethnic group.

Then beyond that to one's nation through national identify. Beyond this, it may evolve to include the global community of all humans, outside ethnic and national boundaries. And then beyond this, it may evolve to include all life beyond human life. And beyond this it may extend to include the entire cosmos and all life everywhere in its potentials as yet unencountered directly. One's center of identity moves from family, to the entire cosmos.

So to answer the question, the larger that circle of what is included versus excluded with what we identify ourselves with, and have empathy and a conscious connection with, will determine how we see and interact and treat life forms other than our own. Many have no problem just smashing that insect as if it were nothing at all. Others would consider that to be an unjustifiable aggression against life, with utter disregard for its beauty and miracle of existence. It shows that they see only themselves as valuable, and don't see anything else that isn't them as worth consideration. That is a matter of levels of awareness itself.

I find myself able to connect with all life at the spiritual level, yet at the same time I recognize the practicality of the natural systems we live in, as mentioned about the co-evolution of humans and livestock (not the industrialization of it). I see it as literally being that "stewards of the garden", to borrow that metaphor. It is a moral and spiritual responsibility we have. I do not believe in killing for sport, "Yeah, I got him square between the eyes!" But I do recognize killing for food. That can be done from a place of respect and regard for the life that gave itself for you. It's not "nothing" to kill an animal.

So balance is the way of life. It's yin and yang, not "Yang baby! Crush that ant hard!". Nor is in all yin, when you are like the Jain who walk five feet per hour in order to not kill any insects that might be on the ground. Both are extreme imbalances. Favor the yin, but utilize the yang when necessary.

Very beautifully put. Thanks for taking the timw to write that all out

 

[Subduction Zone]

Depends at what temp the meat gets heated to and what temp is needed to kill the potential foodborne illness. Some people like their meat "rare"

Which is why, for HIV at least, an open wound is still needed. The virus can survive in a human body rather easily. Except in the stomach where acids will quickly destroy it.

 

[Soandso]

If not for disease yes.

Interesting. No reservations, eh? What about for dogs or cats?

 

[Harel13]

As stated by other Jewish members, it's not kosher. So no.

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

I say no, but because I think they would taste awful.

 

[Soandso]

I say no, but because I think they would taste awful.

What if they tasted better than any other kind of meat and had no risk associated with them. Would you eat them then?

 

[The Hammer]

Probably from cooking it, not eating it Have you ever cut yourself while cooking? I have. If one did and was not careful when handling "bush meat" one could get an infection from it.

Once cooked it was probably safe. Even if a virus survived it would still need an open wound to enter the system.

I'm not sure if cooking actually destroys SIV. But maybe yeah.

 

[Debater Slayer]

No, for three reasons:

1. They're too closely related to us, as others have said. I would feel like a cannibal.
2. The possibility of disease is quite high.
3. They're an endangered species.

These are the reasons I consider logical. Another reason I didn't list, due to its extreme subjectivity, is the fact that I'm simply not used to eating them at all. Even if all of the logical reasons didn't exist, I would feel too disgusted to eat them.

I'll stick to chicken and other types of meat instead.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Sure, if it's all that is on the menu.
You'd be surprised what you would eat if it was that or die.

I've had meat some consider weird, muskrats, beaver, bobcat, squirrel. Practically lived in deer for a lot of years. Some taste better than others but it's not an ethical issue with me.

 

[metis]

This is a question I have for all of my meat eating friends. If you had the opportunity to eat chimpanzee meat, would you? Why or why not?

With or without gravy?

 

[Soandso]

Sure, if it's all that is on the menu.
You'd be surprised what you would eat if it was that or die.

I've had meat some consider weird, muskrats, beaver, bobcat, squirrel. Practically lived in deer for a lot of years. Some taste better than others but it's not an ethical issue with me.

I guess I care less about the ethics of it and more about the appeal vs. Repulsion of it. Let's say you are well to do and it turns out that chinpanzee is the best tasting, most safest to eat meat on earth. Do you fire up the barbecue for chimpanzee steaks?

Is there hesitancy? If so, where does that come from? If not, which sauce or dry rub would you prefer?

 

[Soandso]

With or without gravy?

Gravy on any meat but turkey is a crime, imo

 

[Wildswanderer]

I guess I care less about the ethics of it and more about the appeal vs. Repulsion of it. Let's say you are well to do and it turns out that chinpanzee is the best tasting, most safest to eat meat on earth. Do you fire up the barbecue for chimpanzee steaks?

Is there hesitancy? If so, where does that come from? If not, which sauce or dry rub would you prefer?

It's an animal. Put chimpanzee steaks on the grill and I'll sprinkle a just little seasoning on...I like my meat fairly natural.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Sure, if it's all that is on the menu.
You'd be surprised what you would eat if it was that or die.

I've had meat some consider weird, muskrats, beaver, bobcat, squirrel. Practically lived in deer for a lot of years. Some taste better than others but it's not an ethical issue with me.

I would love to try deer. I don't think I'd try the rest, though, but that's a purely personal thing.

 

[metis]

Gravy on any meat but turkey is a crime, imo

So, you are willing to discriminate against all other forms of meat, eh??? Oh, the shame!

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

What if they tasted better than any other kind of meat and had no risk associated with them. Would you eat them then?

That would be like asking, "if you couldn't be a man anymore would you choose to be a woman instead?" I refuse to entertain this question with a valid response.