Richard Dawkins claims we should eat lab-grown human meat

[emjay]

Thanks for the info Don't worry, I didn't understand what you were saying anyway... just thought you were having a dig at the vagueness of my comment about the disease... so I guess I got a bit defensive.

LOL, not yours, no, lol.  

Anyway, it's just speculation and not well thought out... not based on anything in particular just that it would make sense to me from an evolutionary point of view (maybe... as I said, not well thought out) that eating one's own kind wouldn't be good for the species... and given the curious fact that all meat tastes different... which implies to me that they each have their own sort of chemical signature, it didn't seem much of a leap to think animals could have an aversion to certain signatures. But as I said this just a rough thought, and it could be a load of bollocks, but it's not exactly important to me... just a rough and throwaway thought.

Well that's why I think it's interesting.  It's a rough throwaway thought that seems to make sense.  Cannibalism is part of the mating ritual of some species.  It's the fuckers who get eaten that have all the bay-bees.  The idea that a species might have an aversion to a specific taste is well thought out, though, well developed.  We do.  We're naturally averse to bitterness because bitterness indicates toxin.   

However, what does "human-ness" indicate..what are we supposed to be averse to.

Fair point... there are some species that engage in cannibalism... Praying Mantis' and maybe some types of spiders come to mind... but for them, though I've not got the slightest clue why they do that, it seems to be part of their lifecycle... not just individually but as a group... ie their reproductive goals are met... so in the balance of the whatever counts as their 'society'/collective, especially where there are many males to one female or whatever (ie like a hive, where some are expendible in service to the queen), it just doesn't seem to be detrimental at all to their success as a species. In other words it just seems that that's a finely balanced part of their ecosystem. But in the human case it would not be like that... not part of our nature but rather a deviation from it, and thus something that could upset that equivalent balance. If that makes sense? You're making me think more than I was planning to in this thread... I was just dipping in the middle of watching a programme