Friday, January 16, 2009

An argument that makes me want to tear out my hair...

...and then braid it into an effigy of the arguer and set it on fire.

I don't mean to offend or scare anyone with any implications of homicidal thoughts for bad arguments. Even for the most baseless, radical, and disgustingly stupid arguments I stop at thoughts of effigies. Granted, there is also quite a bit of rage involved.

I also hate to sound like I'm putting myself significantly above anyone trying to argue one point or another. I usually don't like to participate in vegan vs. omnivore arguments because I've been in far more than my share, most in which neither side came away the wiser. But, I respect people who do argue their side of any issue, no matter what their side or the issue is.

However, I cannot respect people who present an argument which makes completely obvious the fact that they have taken no time whatsoever to find any evidence to back up such an argument, or to simply examine the world around them and spend a little time deconstructing this -thing- that they pulled out of their ass and mistook for a legitimate viewpoint because they either liked the sound of it, or it helped them to forget that what they may have been considering before was a real issue worth a little more mental CPU time than deciding whether to make their toast before or after they take a crap in the morning.

This blog entry is dedicated to one argument from the omnivorous side of the fence that I feel fits the above description, and I hear it far too often for how absurdly weak it is. It has its so-called basis in physiology, and perhaps evolutionary theory if you want to give it that much credit. For anyone playing at home, I'm not referring to the hunter-gatherer argument, or the theory that eating meat somehow made our brains larger and more complex. Those are also both common arguments from the omni crowd -- the former being one that I do respect somewhat, while the latter is treading thin ice over the frozen lake of easily debunked mindless banter. The argument that I am thinking of would actually be taking a stroll with the latter, but what makes it break the ice and sink (but not die, strangely) is the undue gusto and pride with which it is usually presented, sometimes as though it is the end-all be-all of pro-meat-eating propaganda. It is (drumroll.......) this:



Can you see it? It took me a while to find it, too. Here I've marked it:



The red arrow in the above image is pointing to a human canine tooth. I hope I marked it right. I had to identify it by counting teeth rather than by sight. Supposedly, even though it can't be immediately identified as something that is supposed to tear through flesh, this little tooth is a prime marker for our omnivorous nature. It is there expressly to tear through flesh according to some omnivores I've spoken to, who all seem to be either overly proud or overly confident in their assertions. I've even been told to go to a dentist, who I guess would be an expert in the field of teeth, and ask him or her "what my teeth are for" after telling an omnivore that I was a vegan. I guess he assumed that a dentist would tell me that my canine teeth are for tearing into meat.

If a dentist did tell me that my canine teeth are for tearing into meat, I think it would be just another symptom of we as a society forgetting what exactly meat is, and where meat comes from. Meat is not something that originates cured in plastic packaging, sliced between deli paper, or baked, boiled, broiled, or cooked in any way. It is flesh from a living creature which billions of years of evolution have made tough enough to withstand harsh elements and some predator encounters. It does not "fall off the bone" or "melt in your mouth" naturally. The thought that a human being could rip through the flesh of a cow like a real predator with our "canine" teeth is absurd. On the other hand, these teeth look like they may be able to accomplish such a feat:



Pictured above are real canine teeth, as the skull is that of a real canine. In this picture you can easily identify the teeth which would make this animal capable of taking down and eating live prey. If we were a modern society of dogs the pro-meat canine teeth argument might actually hold some water, until you consider that despite their dental configuration even dogs are omnivorous and can live happy, long vegan lives if given the proper nutrition.

Humans do have a long history of being able to eat almost any plant or creature in sight, but that trait is surely not due to the configuration of our puny teeth. Instead, it was our brains which became complex enough which allowed us to hunt, farm, cook, and to make use of any food source, plant or animal, and consequently spread all over the globe. Now that we no longer need to kill animals to sustain ourselves, I hope that we can use our brains to figure out a way to live humanely and sustainably for the sake of all creatures on this planet.

Whether or not this blog convinces anyone to adopt a vegan lifestyle, I hope that I've at least accomplished something worthwhile by making the Appeal to Dental Anomaly argument for omnivorism sound fittingly absurd. I felt it was about time somebody did so in short-essay format. However, I feel one cannot truly appreciate the absurdity of this argument until one hears or reads it from the horse's mouth or keyboard, with all of it's accompanying fervor and gusto. I present to you the segment of the Amazon.com review which inspired this blog post:


"I do NOT buy into the argument that the human body is able to be sustained by eating massive quantities of grains and veggies. God gave us canine teeth for a good reason - to tear into some tasty MEAT!"


Why argue from nature alone when you can bring God into this silly, silly picture? You'd think that if God had intended us to be obligate omnivores he (or whatever pronoun designation you prefer) would have set us up with the real canine tooth model. In defense of the Biblical God's design, in Genesis "He" gives Adam and Eve permission to eat "every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed". Hey, that sounds like God's original intention for Adam and Eve was that they be vegan. Sounds like somebody's a little mixed up on their religious views, but maybe I've discounted this Amazon reviewer too soon. Perhaps the day will come when somebody can point me to the Bible verse, "For God did giveth man his tiny canine teeth so that he could tear into some tasty MEAT," and all will be forgiven.

No comments: