In regards to eating meat

[yossarian]

Thanks for clarifying, and my apologies if I misrepresented your views. I see now you were recommending a high-fruit raw vegan diet. However, my reaction to them hasn't changed. Instead of simply sharing what worked for you, or rather what you thought was working for you, the reply you gave way back in the beginning of the thread implies that you are speaking from some sort of expertise. It is matter-of-fact.

You are criticizing people who promote unsubstantiated theories. I think that's appropriate.

But you're also presenting your own opinion as something infallible. There are many many many unsubstantiated theories in your writing. If my behaviour makes you so angry it's probably because you're just like me.

You are passing off your own diet views as absolute truth. You are saying "Everyone needs something different! There is no best diet!" and promoting this claim as an absolute, unquestionable truth. You don't present evidence, you just write passionately on the topic and make assertions, similar to how I did it back in 2009.

And there are certain elements of it which I thought were (and still think are) potentially harmful advice. In particular- where you claim that 25 grams of protein is all the body needs to function in a day.

Prove it--or you're just doing what I was doing--making assertions.

Do you know that an obese person could get severely ill, or even die from eating that little protein, for any extended period of time? Especially if they were exercising hard to try and lose weight.

Are you trying to make me feel guilty? On what moral principle are you condemning me? Being wrong? Having the courage of my convictions? Being a fanatic? Being an extremist true believer?

I'm completely fallible and I'm in the habit of arguing vigorously to support my position. I actually am not convinced that I am wrong about the vegan modification to the paleolithic diet. Having said that, I'm not an expert and after going down that rabbit hole I decided I didn't want to anymore and was going to specialize in a different field.

Did that factor into your post anywhere? Or were you just parroting what you heard from a food guru as if it were "God's Word" on diet?

Pretty much.

We've got people like DW out there speaking authoritatively on a subject that is completely beyond his scope and expertise. Source field theories and Disclosure are his purview... but telling everybody how to eat? I don't think so, and especially when every other blog post talks about some or another illness he perhaps should think twice about whether he has been fed some BS about diet, and is now spreading that BS around to his "followers".

How does channelled material have any more credibility than anyone? On one hand you want credibility and proof and stuff, and on the other hand you take Ra at his word that Karma exists.

To my view- this type of activity carries orders of magnitude more karmic weight than does meat eating.

Prove karma exists. You can't. You're pushing your beliefs on others and your beliefs have no basis in observable fact.

I understand you have changed your views since then, and have re-incorporated meat eating. As I said back in that other post- I am actually curious to understand what goes on in a person's mind when they are so sure about one thing, and later come back around to the opposite. Are you so sure about your diet now, as you were then?

I haven't changed my views. I dropped my views. I decided I was no longer interested in being a food pioneer and was going to just stick to convention, like the ancient skeptics. I still believe the paleolithic diet is the most healthy diet, for everyone! And if you modify the paleolithic diet to be vegan by finding substitutes for the nutrition derived from meat, you can have a vegan paleolithic diet!

How do you feel now about having broadcasted to the world that raw vegan was the "best way" and that nobody should eat apples?

It was a point of view. I was speaking passionately on something I had studied and tried out. At the time my blood sugar was probably through the roof from all the fruit I was eating. From my own perspective my behaviour then appears fanatical and extremist. But I basically express myself in a sensationalist, extremist way most of the time.

I don't strive to be a perfect human being. I actually think that is foolish. I strive to accept myself, flaws included. All I can do is be myself and take others into consideration. I'm semi-comfortable being wrong, although I'm still not convinced that I was.

Let's assume that I was completely wrong and my advice would have killed people. Let's assume that my advice was similar to telling someone they should drink antifreeze. According to the Law of One, what is wrong with this?

The Law of One says that there are no mistakes. It's an amoral teaching. So what are you raging against and why? How do you know that your form of service to humanity (telling them that fruitarianism is always wrong) is better than my form of service to humanity (telling people to drink antifreeze)?

How do you even define service? Doesn't the LOO define service in completely subjective terms anyway? Service is doing whatever an individual thinks service is, so service is completely subjective and you're incapable of knowing whether I'm serving someone or not and vice versa.

You seem to be morally outraged. I suspect this is because you're emotionally still a Christian. You still believe there is right and wrong and that you can tell the difference between the two. You believe that the purpose of your life is to serve others--but it's impossible to figure out how to do that because you can never really tell what is real service. Maybe being told to drink antifreeze is precisely what that person needed to grow.

I want to analyze this from a moral perspective in terms of the LOO. How do you know it's bad karma if you can't even judge what is STO and STS? Ra says this isn't the density of knowing. Why do you even bother?