Randall's Blog

A recent essay in the New York Times (If Peas Can Talk, Should We Eat Them? by Michael Marder) about the "ethical implications" stemming from research on pea plant "intelligence" prompted me to finish writing this post. This isn't really a new story, as the essay points out, as speculation of this kind has been going on since at least the 1970s. I started the post after an online exchange with someone about virtually the same topic. Not coincidentally, they're both philosophers.

The NYT essay details some recent findings about how plants communicate. The research was done on pea plants and as with most plant communication, involves sending out biochemical signals which other plants respond to. Again, this is not particularly new but as a biologist I am impressed with the complexity of interactions between plants. Indeed, I'm happy go on record conceding that plants are wonderfully complex organisms that are capable of rudimentary communication, biochemical memory etc. - for a review see this. However, it's mystifying to me that anyone who has taken high school biology and can think clearly would believe this raises any kind of ethical issue.

In the first place, we don't kill pea plants to eat them (even though there are some plants that we do consume this way). We cultivate pea plants and then harvest the peas. Peas are how pea plants reproduce - the plants live only one growing season, produce seeds and then die. The seeds are dispersed in the evolutionary hope that some of them will find a suitable location to sprout the following year and complete the cycle. When humans intervene in this process by gathering peas in the summer and then planting a portion of them the following spring we are doing the plants a favor. Their existence as plants is unaltered by our intervention except for the better. We protect them, fertilize them, water them and distribute their seeds widely. I'm not a philosopher, but I don't see any "ethical implications" here.

As it turns out, the vast majority of plant foods that humans eat fall into this or a very similar category. Fruits and vegetables are similarly produced by plants so that animals will be attracted to them and in the process of consuming them will disperse the seeds they contain. All grains, legumes, nuts, fruits and most vegetables that are consumed by people are produced by plants for the purposes of reproduction and don't involve killing the plants. So far, as a vegan, my conscience is pretty clear. Meanwhile, the author of the NYT essay is waxing poetic about how serious this all is - "Inquiring into justifications for consuming vegetal beings thus reconceived, we reach one of the final frontiers of dietary ethics." Seriously? Is this the best contemporary philosophy has to offer? Thankfully it isn't as Peter Singer's work demonstrates.

Secondly, even when we consume plants, such as lettuce or other leafy greens, where the whole plant is eaten there is absolutely no indication that plants suffer or feel pain by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. Animals, on the other hand, can show very clear indications of feeling pain and suffering while being raised and killed as "food animals" by humans. At least this is what I thought... During an exchange with someone on Facebook I learned how drastically "contemporary philosophy" and some fuzzy thinking can be used to turn these fairly simple observations around.

It started with one of the many vegetarian/vegan posts that are put up on Facebook (at least when you are friends with as many vegetarian/vegans as I am). I will try to paraphrase the other fellow's stance but it's somewhat difficult as he seemed mainly intent on challenging other peoples' assumptions and justifications rather than clearly setting out his own. He cited similar research on plants to that reported in the NYT essay and indicated that if we were to observe plants using time lapse photography they might seem more animal like in their responses. This seemed to be the basis for a belief that "Life is life" and "If it's wrong to eat a cow, how about an insect? If it's wrong to eat an insect, then how about a piece of fruit?" Really?

It seemed that none of the arguments I made that might differentiate a cow from a lettuce plant were valid. Who knew that the fact that we are so much more closely related evolutionarily to cows than lettuce plants and that humans and cows have such similar nervous systems and physiologies is no basis to believe that they feel pain and suffer like we do? The observation that cows seem to react in a similar way to the same kinds of stimuli that humans would react to is also a completely invalid argument. All those millions of years of evolution developing our "theory of mind" was completely worthless by this line of thinking. Frankly, as a scientist I was a little taken aback by the arrogance of his comments, as if philosophers were the only people who could think clearly about anything. Scientists use methods all the time that are known to potentially give misleading conclusions - statistics comes to mind. We know what the potential flaws are and use other methods to make sure we are not being led astray. The alternative is to throw up your hands and say that we can never know anything, hummmm......

I guess if someone could produce a time lapse video of a lettuce plant "running" away from an approaching hungry vegan I might be a little more convinced (how would a lettuce plant run anyway?). Yet, if we had such a video why would this indicate that plants are experiencing fear when very clear evidence of animals doing this is insufficient for philosophers to accept that animals experience the same emotions as we do? Why the acceptance of potential plant sensitivity and the utter rejection of animal sensitivity? Once again, if this is an example of what contemporary philosophy has to offer, I am not impressed!

Indeed, you might think that people who seem to be so sensitive to the subtle reactions of plants would be constructing a diet that would minimize this kind of trauma - perhaps only eating fruits and seeds, but you'd be wrong. These "concerns" about plants seem to be mainly an attempt to create a false equivalence between plants and animals regarding ethical considerations. But rather than this leading to more ethical eating it seems to lead to a complete abdication of any ethical concerns when it comes to eating - after a long hard day of philosophical consideration of these matters they are free to eat whatever they want. "Yes waiter, I'd like the veal cutlets and some foie gras as an appetizer..."

Even if you believe that plants are capable of all the kinds of responses that animals display this is no justification to eat animals. As I have demonstrated above, most plant foods don't involve killing plants or even disrupting their life cycle (if you are really that concerned) and producing them certainly doesn't involve the kind of pain, suffering and early death that "food" animals endure. I don't know the motives of these people but the fact that these kinds of arguments lead to abandoning ethical behavior when it comes to diet rather than informing it gives me some clue.

However, even though I'm a life-long vegetarian and decades-long vegan I don't believe that my diet is free of any ethical issues. I know about the animals that are killed in industrial monoculture farming - it's still better to eat the corn than feed a whole bunch of it to animals and then eat the animals. I know that people work many backbreaking hours to pick fruits and vegetables so I try to purchase more local and organic foods but I know what I do is not perfect. I feel very lucky that I live at a time that allows me to mainly avoid animal cruelty for my daily sustenance. Further, I don't consider myself morally superior to people around me that choose to eat differently than I do. People make food choices every day and even though I know I can do better I am comfortable with mine. What I'm not concerned about, however, are any "ethical implications" involving eating plant foods - you shouldn't be either.

Cheers!

I haven't written anything in a while as I have been busy with a class I have been teaching this semester. I'm spending much of my free time getting lectures prepared. It is good to be teaching in my field, though - even if it's only for this semester. I did take a few days to visit with Dave & Kathie in Ohio and Debbie & I took a quick trip to New York.

I have been thinking of a post that talks about some recent on-line arguments/discussions I have had - you can encounter some far out ideas on the web. This will have to wait till I have more time to devote to it, though. In the meanwhile here are some recent photos.

Taken in NYC:

Taken in Ohio:

Taken in my back yard:

A frost killed all the Magnolia flowers the next day

I have started a few blog posts in the last few months that I can't seem to finish. My frustration/anger/disgust and fear levels are rising -

It's early 2012, in the coming months we will be subjected to yet another painful presidential election and the accompanying congressional contests. I have made it clear that I don't intend to vote for Obama for a second term. The knee-jerk reaction of Democrats and liberals is to question why I want Michelle Bachmann or Mitt Romney to be president. Well, I'm sick of this ever more pointless charade every 4 years. I don't want to be lectured about the realities of our current political system - thank you but I'm well aware of this reality. I'm also aware of a much more important reality - we need real fundamental change in our society (and throughout the world) and it will never come from the corporate-sponsored Democrats or the corporate-sponsored Republicans. Everything Ralph Nader has been saying about how little difference there is between them is true - they are the problem, not the solution. I'm not going to waste time detailing all the ways Obama has betrayed the progressive voters that elected him to office, it's has been done elsewhere, all you have to do is open your eyes to the truth. I will say that Obama has been quite effective in maintaining the status quo. Everything he has done has kept the current power structure intact from the healthcare industry to Wall Street to the Banksters to the military/security/prison industrial complex. He has served the interests of the elite at the expense of the vast majority of ordinary people. Obama does not deserve our votes.

As friends and family already know, I mention the apocalypse on a regular basis. I believe that this has caused some confusion and so now I will attempt to clarify what I mean when I say "apocalypse." I'm not referring to biblical prophecy, I don't believe the men who wrote the Bible had any gift or ability to see the future. The only resemblance between what is written in the Bible and the events that are unfolding today are the result of the fact that human nature has not changed in the last 6000 years and so the same motivations and frailties that people had in the past we also have now. I'm also not referring to any Mayan prophecy. If things go bad in the year 2012 I believe this would just be a coincidence.

There are, however, a combination of events occurring which are unprecedented on a global scale. This “perfect storm” of circumstances have created a very dangerous situation for humankind. I have detailed them previously and many other writers have discussed peak oil, climate change, soil depletion etc. so I won't go into details. I don't think it's a coincidence that the global financial situation is destabilizing at this time as well because these factors are all interrelated. Here are some links that explain what's going on in greater detail and more eloquently than I would be able - please consider reading this and this and this and listening to this long but excellent interview with Chris Hedges:

The reaction to these multitude of issues we are facing is quite variable. I've talked to people in each group. The denialists believe all these issues are made up and there is unlimited oil, resources etc. for humans to grow indefinitely. This fiction is fed and maintained by right-wing conspiracy theorists and others whose financial gain depends upon maintaining the status quo. Although I certainly understand people's skepticism it's important to be judicious and careful with skepticism so as not to be misled by powerful interests. The classic example of this was how the tobacco industry maintained and fed skepticism amongst the public about the health risks of smoking. People wanted to believe that the addictive products they were consuming were not harmful and so it was in the interests of the tobacco industry to dispute, fund research and otherwise muddy the waters so that the clear dangers of smoking were obscured. My own personal guide to skepticism includes economic motives as the most important factor when determining when the truth is being obscured.

Other people, have a hard time hearing about these issues. It's not that they deny their existence, it's just that the truth is difficult to accept and contemplate. I imagine many Europeans in the 1930s had the same difficulty in accepting the ugly truth about the Nazis. Many people could see what was coming and warned others. The ones that heeded the warning and left were a lot better off than those that refused to believe it or didn't want to hear it and stayed. In our current situation there is no place to run to. Our problems are global in nature - we can't escape. We either learn how to live on this planet sustainably and peacefully or will suffer very unpleasant future.

People are out in the streets protesting, which is a good sign. The "Occupy Movement" has changed the conversation from deficits and taxes to inequality and social justice. What will the Spring bring to this movement? I hope it expands in scope and grows in numbers. The elites fear this kind of protest. It's the same rage against a system that only works for the very wealthy (the 1% or the 0.1%) that has put people all over Europe on the streets. The global banking system is trying to strangle the people of the world into debt slavery and the people are resisting. Meanwhile it looks like Obama and Netanyahu are hell bent on starting WWIII by attacking Iran as a distraction. Since none of the economic problems were actually fixed over the last few years I guess this should be expected. 2012 will be a crazy year and I'm not looking forward to it...

I just set up a website to gather information for a book I'm writing with my daughter, Rebecca, about different diets and to share information about the book project. The book title "What Should We Eat?" was chosen because this simple question has become a difficult one to answer. We are bombarded with so much conflicting information about what to eat in our society. Once you depart from the "standard American diet" there are so many different dietary choices out there - how do you choose?

The idea for this book started with a book chapter I wrote several years ago for an edited book on eating meat. The chapter title links to a PDF if you're interested. The book contains many varied viewpoints and is a worthwhile read.

What Is Our Natural Diet And Should We Really Care?
From Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat
Prometheus Books 2004, Edited by Steve F. Sapontzis.

Since so many contemporary alternative diets claim to be "natural" I decided to expand the chapter to include lots of different diets and also to try to understand why people are drawn to specific ways of eating. I decided to invite my daughter, who is now a registered dietitian, to join me as a co-author.

Our website is pretty minimal at this point but we have set up a survey that we hope you will be kind enough to take. If you have tried or are currently eating an "alternative" diet (vegan, raw, paleo, macrobiotic etc.) please visit our website and check out our survey. http://www.whatshouldweeatbook.com/

I add this praying mantis for no particular reason:

Recently I digitized a bunch of home movies onto my computer. I had previously digitized almost all of my slides and negatives and old family photographs. Hard drive space is so cheap now that hours of video fit comfortably on my laptop hard drive. Some of these movies were pretty amusing. Others contain footage of my father before he died and there was plenty of footage of my children when they were younger. There were many short video updates done when I was fixing up a house I owned with my 2nd wife in Amsterdam NY. Unfortunately, that house and all the work that we did on it has joined the many thousands of abandoned and decaying homes all across the country.

It's not that I wish I still lived there or regret my decision to move to Boston in the late 90s. It's just that I'm saddened that the work I did was essentially wasted. I spent quite a bit of time on a property in Patchogue NY in a house and a barn that my great-grandfather built. The property was a summer home for him and his family starting in the 1920s. He used an odd construction method, pouring concrete between 2x4s to create walls of wood and concrete. That property eventually made its way to my mother's aunt and then to my mother. She sold it in 2000 and eventually the old buildings were torn down and new houses were built on the property. As far as I can tell, nothing remains of what my great-grandfather built. I'm beginning to wonder if anything I create in my lifetime will remain for future generations.

My mother and her grandmother in front of the Patchogue barn September 1928 - 83 years ago:

To my knowledge my own father never built anything, never created anything - yet he had a lasting impact on people. In his barbershop he had a captive audience and would extol the virtues of healthy eating, exercise etc. to anyone who stopped in. My mother went through a phase where she painted and I still have her watercolors and oil paintings. She also kept many journals but another question is will anyone read them? I have written a book chapter, a masters thesis and a dissertation. I can see that people download the dissertation from time to time. I can't tell if anyone actually reads it. I do have some scientific papers in academic journals and I can tell if they are cited. Some are pretty well cited but will they mean anything in 100 years? I doubt it.

I know I'm only 50 but I'm starting to wonder what (if anything) I will leave behind of lasting value. I've started working on a book project with Rebecca. I hope it turns out to be something valuable enough that future generations will read it but I guess we have little control over things like that. Hopefully, I still have lots of time to write and create.

Moving along, Debbie and I have been doing more short trips this summer. We did some hiking, made a trip to Boston, Hew Hampshire & Maine (cut short by Irene), and to Cooperstown NY. I went to Florida for Lowell & Turtle's engagement party (which was a lot of fun) and to Cleveland to finish work on a project for Dave & Kathie.

Debbie & I tabled at LarkFest for AVN. We have the Albany vegetarian food festival coming up next Saturday 10/1 and the Boston vegetarian food festival at the end of October. We are still waiting for results from Debbie's bar exam. We are both volunteering - hours are good, pay not so much.

I can't say that our garden was a great producer this year but we have gotten a steady stream of veggies to eat.

In Cooperstown: