In regards to eating meat

[Tenet Nosce]

Firstly, thanks for your reply. And I hope you didn't see my post as offensive as it has been made out to be. I saw an opportunity to converse and genuinely thought you would have something valuable to contribute to me from the conversation.

But you're also presenting your own opinion as something infallible.

I don't believe my opinion is infallible. I do believe it is clearly supported by research. We are not talking about one or two studies, we are talking about entire fields of science which didn't even exist before, such as nutrigenomics. Perhaps you are not aware of this.

There are many many many unsubstantiated theories in your writing.

What is theory is not presented as fact. If it appears that way, it is unintentional. I attempt to be cognizant of delineating my own personal hypotheses by saying things like What if...? or Maybe... though I am sure I am not perfect at it.

If my behaviour makes you so angry it's probably because you're just like me.

Yes. Your behavior reminds me exactly of a memory I feel from the time of Atlantis when I charismatically and self-righteously led people down a path that led to great destruction.

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.

This is akin to saying that I am attempting to pass geology off as absolute truth, and demanding proof that geology exists. Yes, geology exists, and there are entire textbooks written upon the subject.

I've made no claims about who should eat what. I don't believe we have the answers to that. And I am even skeptical that those answers will ever come from science. But what we do know is that the same foods are metabolized by different bodies in different ways. Yes, I think that is a fact. If you really want me to post links to textbooks with pages of medical references, I will be happy to do that.

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.

It is a fundamental fact of human physiology that the human body requires a minimum of 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram body weight daily to support its total metabolic function. This information is easily verified by measuring the amount of nitrogen that comes out in your urine. The concept of nitrogen balance is fundamental to any kind of understanding about how not only the human body, but any sort of life works. You can easily find this information from countless sources available on the Internet. It is generally accepted as common knowledge among physicians, nurses, and dieticians. Even the vast majority of "alternative" ones.

Are you trying to make me feel guilty?

No, absolutely not.

On what moral principle are you condemning me?

I'm not condemning you to anything. I think you have learned something that I want to know about, and so I am asking you pointed questions about it.

Being a fanatic?

Yes, I want to understand more of what it is like to be a fanatic. It appears that you have had success balancing this issue within yourself, and I would like you to share your wisdom with me about it. I feel it is my honor/responsibility to offer balance to the energy of fanaticism in the world, and I wish to be more empowered to do that through understanding the process by which a fanatic arrives at balance.

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

I could give a rat's hiney whether or not you believe in karma. If you said, hey TN- I don't care about any of that karma baloney, then I would stop writing about it to you.

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.

Why?

I don't strive to be a perfect human being. I actually think that is foolish. I strive to accept myself, flaws included.

Yes- that sounds like a balanced approach to me.

According to the Law of One, what is wrong with this?

Nothing is wrong with it. Unless you, yourself, care about the impact your words and actions have on others, and whether or not there was an intended result. I am perhaps speaking under the assumption that you do care... but if you don't that is fine with me too.

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)?

I'm not raging, and I don't think my service is "better than" yours. It is really quite puzzling to me how others see so much anger and judgement when there is little, but that is a side issue at this point. For now, I'm just trying to understand the fanatic thing.

Look- yes I feel some anger and judgement. But most of it is directed at me, not you. Perhaps you are picking up on that.

But for people to sit there and say I am "raging"... what do you want me to say about that? It just isn't true. If I were emotionally "raging" right now, I wouldn't even be able to type on this keyboard. I assure you that I am quite calmly sitting in my chair.

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.

Service is seeking to know who you are, and attempting to be that. We are always serving others, and ourselves, in one way or another. That is my opinion on the matter.

You seem to be morally outraged.

What is your view on the morality of your actions?

I suspect this is because you're emotionally still a Christian.

Not sure what you mean by this.

You still believe there is right and wrong and that you can tell the difference between the two.

No, I believe right and wrong are relative to one's intention.

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.

I believe that I am serving at all times. The question is, what am I serving?

Maybe being told to drink antifreeze is precisely what that person needed to grow.

I'm willing to consider that possibility.

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?

From my own experience.

Ra says this isn't the density of knowing.

You are right about that.

Why do you even bother?

I'm not really sure. Why do you?

Thanks again for the conversation, it has been enlightening.