Morality vs Nature

December 2, 2006 2:01pm CST
I've just been doing an essay on human evolution in the African Rift and the features that have contributed to human evolution. One of the arguments is that the Rift valley comprises of deep lakes containing marine life which is rich in a protein called DHA. The argument is that brain structures development more due to a high energy diet which marine life provide in abundance. So the theory is that our brains evolved because we ate meat and marine life. However, now it is entirely possible to sustain our brain on plant food (because our brain is not developing as it did and we can obtain more food now). Vegetarians claim that it is immoral to eat animals, we are evolved beings which do not need to eat our fellow animals. My topic to be discussed here is which view is correct. Should we still eat animals because it provides us with a good source of DHA (which is still used today, you can get tablets of things that contain it like Evening Primrose Oil) or should we try and be civilised in a fashion and not eat animals?
1 response
@jaginfo2006 (1757)
• India
2 Dec 06
nature wins always
• Romania
3 Dec 06
Or that`s what we think