Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

"I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men."

This quote has long been attributed to da Vinci, although it has since been shown to be an error but his views on animals are very similar. In The Mind of Leonardo da Vinci, Edward MacCurdy wrote: "…The mere idea of permitting the existence of unnecessary suffering, still more that of taking life, was abhorrent to him. Vasari tells, as an instance of his love of animals, how when in Florence he passed places where birds were sold he would frequently take them from their cages with his own hand, and having paid the sellers the price that was asked would let them fly away in the air, thus giving them back their liberty.

That this horror of inflicting pain was such as to lead him to be a vegetarian is to be inferred from a reference which occurs in a letter sent by Andrea Corsali to Giuliano de’Medici, in which, after telling him of an Indian race called Gujerats, who neither eat anything that contains blood nor permit any injury to any living creature, he adds ‘like our Leonardo da Vinci.’ "

On a similar note, a comedian I was listening to last week mentioned that Einstein had been divorced. He suggested that wedding vows should be changed in the future to reflect Einsein's failure in marriage. Instead of "Do you take....", it should be "Do you think you're smarter than Einstein?".

I guess you had to be there.....

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

I wouldn't have a problem with being vegetarian if animals weren't made out of meat.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

Leonardo da Vinci > purnell.

I abstained from eating flesh (lots of milk and egg though) for a little over two years. I believed I was trying to be compassionate. Toward the end of that time I started thinking that it didn't really matter, that life was cyclical, so animals would eventually be eating me.
[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men.

[/ QUOTE ] That they are both OK?

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

And it's rumored that he was either asexual or gay. Should we follow these lifestyles too because he was so friggin' smart? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

The average gay person, in my experience, is smarter than the average straight person ^_^

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And it's rumored that he was either asexual or gay. Should we follow these lifestyles too because he was so friggin' smart? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you dismiss his intelligence because he may have been gay or asexual?

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I abstained from eating flesh (lots of milk and egg though) for a little over two years. I believed I was trying to be compassionate. Toward the end of that time I started thinking that it didn't really matter, that life was cyclical, so animals would eventually be eating me.
[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You should kill your neighbor before he kills you!

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The average gay person, in my experience, is smarter than the average straight person ^_^

[/ QUOTE ]

not that it really matters, but I think you just outed yourself.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The average gay person, in my experience, is smarter than the average straight person ^_^

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true then maybe David is on to something regarding Religion getting in the way. If gays are smarter then it is because women divert out attention. We could be smarter but get distracted. That is basically what David says about Religion.

Might be a new method for David to pursue in his quest to conquer Religion.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If this is true then maybe David is on to something regarding Religion getting in the way. If gays are smarter then it is because women divert out attention. We could be smarter but get distracted. That is basically what David says about Religion.

Might be a new method for David to pursue in his quest to conquer Religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to tell you this, but gay men are just as 'distracted' as straight men (or so I'm told). The attention just goes to a different place.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

da Vinci wasn't smarter than God, and God gave man dominion over the animals. And he wasn't smarter than nature either, of which carnivores have always been a part once evolution got past a certain point.

Which is convenient for me cause I like meat.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

He is, however, smarter than most carivores.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

It's quite clear that Mr. da Vinci wasn't very intelligent at all:

[ QUOTE ]
Vasari tells, as an instance of his love of animals, how when in Florence he passed places where birds were sold he would frequently take them from their cages with his own hand, and having paid the sellers the price that was asked would let them fly away in the air, thus giving them back their liberty.

[/ QUOTE ]

All this does is create a market for more birds, and so new birds will go through the torture of imprisonment. He's actually increased suffering by doing this.

And yes, I am. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If this is true then maybe David is on to something regarding Religion getting in the way. If gays are smarter then it is because women divert out attention. We could be smarter but get distracted. That is basically what David says about Religion.

Might be a new method for David to pursue in his quest to conquer Religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to tell you this, but gay men are just as 'distracted' as straight men (or so I'm told). The attention just goes to a different place.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd argue that gay men are even more distracted.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And it's rumored that he was either asexual or gay. Should we follow these lifestyles too because he was so friggin' smart? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you dismiss his intelligence because he may have been gay or asexual?

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? I knew I should of put a disclaimer at the end.
I think you missed my point. The OP is taking different subjects ("intelligence" vs. lifestyle choice) and relating them. He's basically saying that because Da Vinci was brilliant that his way of living must be correct because he's so brilliant - which is rarely the case. If you look at brilliant people in history they're often some messed up people emotionally or in relationships (not that I am saying anything's wrong with being gay).
I guess I should have made my point clearer but I was just trying to make the point about the separation between the two subjects.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
WTF? I knew I should of put a disclaimer at the end.
I think you missed my point. The OP is taking different subjects ("intelligence" vs. lifestyle choice) and relating them. He's basically saying that because Da Vinci was brilliant that his way of living must be correct because he's so brilliant - which is rarely the case. If you look at brilliant people in history they're often some messed up people emotionally or in relationships (not that I am saying anything's wrong with being gay).
I guess I should have made my point clearer but I was just trying to make the point about the separation between the two subjects.

[/ QUOTE ]

For most, being a vegetarian is a conscious decision made on facts. Your sexual preference is almost never a choice.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
da Vinci wasn't smarter than God, and God gave man dominion over the animals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dominion doesn't mean killing. You might want to look up the definition. Don't you have dominion over your children?

[ QUOTE ]
And he wasn't smarter than nature either, of which carnivores have always been a part once evolution got past a certain point.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not necessary for man to survive as a carnivore. How do you know that evolution won't filter out carnivores at some point?

Reminds me of a guy at work who confronted me: "Have you ever seen a lion chase down his prey?" "Yes" "Do you think the lion should be punished for killing?"

If you want to compare yourself to the beasts of the land, then go ahead. I'd like to think that humans are getting intelligent to realize we can live without killing animals for food and should.

As another poster stated, I certainly hope that a much more intelligent species doesn't visit our Earth with the same opinion of lower intelligent life.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
WTF? I knew I should of put a disclaimer at the end.
I think you missed my point. The OP is taking different subjects ("intelligence" vs. lifestyle choice) and relating them. He's basically saying that because Da Vinci was brilliant that his way of living must be correct because he's so brilliant - which is rarely the case. If you look at brilliant people in history they're often some messed up people emotionally or in relationships (not that I am saying anything's wrong with being gay).
I guess I should have made my point clearer but I was just trying to make the point about the separation between the two subjects.

[/ QUOTE ]

For most, being a vegetarian is a conscious decision made on facts. Your sexual preference is almost never a choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Touche. Bad example with the sexual preference thing. Maybe Picasso chose to be abusive (or any number of scientists, artists, etc. and their non-intrinsic flaws) would work better.
Although isn't vegetarianism based on morals (or ethics or whatever) rather than facts?
I still think that following someone's lifestyle because, wow, they're really smart, is not the way to go about it.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I still think that following someone's lifestyle because, wow, they're really smart, is not the way to go about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand, but I think it has some relevance. I didn't choose it because da Vinci did, but I think it lends some credibility to it for me when I see who is. It isn't exactly the same as drinking Sprite because your favorite athlete does.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[censored] vegetarianism.

that is all the topic deserves. (note: i'm not talking about 'taste' vegetarians)

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The average gay person, in my experience, is smarter than the average straight person ^_^

[/ QUOTE ]

That's OK. We dumbass breeders will inherit the Earth after those intelligent gays die off.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
da Vinci wasn't smarter than God, and God gave man dominion over the animals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dominion doesn't mean killing. You might want to look up the definition. Don't you have dominion over your children?



[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't God tell Abraham to kill his own son? Doesn't the Bible tell you to kill your children if they curse you?

I think God (at least, the biblical one referenced by the post you responded to) might have a different definition of dominion than you do, one more in line with the earlier poster.

PS And don't forget about the various animal sacrifices that good old Yaweh demanded.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

Sure, da Vinci was a smart guy. But Newton was smarter, so there's really no way out of it -- I'm simply compelled to eat meat.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I still think that following someone's lifestyle because, wow, they're really smart, is not the way to go about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand, but I think it has some relevance. I didn't choose it because da Vinci did, but I think it lends some credibility to it for me when I see who is. It isn't exactly the same as drinking Sprite because your favorite athlete does.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you can basically pick any behavior, abherrant or not, and find some "genius" in history that did it. I don't think that gives it credibility. Wagner was an antisemite. Should I hate jewish folk because he was brilliant?

(I mean this in a completely light-hearted way) I am amused by the fact that someone with your screenname is a vegetarian. It clashes with my stereotyping.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is not necessary for man to survive as a carnivore.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to compare yourself to the beasts of the land, then go ahead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't remember who said this (maybe Ted Nugent) so I cannot properly credit, but anyway what he said was "Predators have eyes on the front of their head, and prey species have eyes on the side of their head. As long as my eyes are on the front of my head I will not feel guilty enjoying a juicy steak."

Since then I haven't felt guilty either.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

When discussing the merits of vegetarianism, one point seems to be overlooked: being a vegetarian is not easy. I, like most vegetarians, at one time enjoyed eating meat, and it was very difficult to give it up. But I did, because I am concerned about the suffering of animals, and do not want to contribute to it.

On the other hand, a meat eater gives up nothing: he likes meat, and keeps eating it.

This distinction is important when analyzing the credibility of arguments for or against vegetarianism. I suspect that most people who reject vegetarianism nevertheless care about animal suffering, at least on some level, and would be horrified if they saw what went on in meat factories and the pain that the animals endure. Nevertheless, they enjoy eating meat and do not want to give it up. They, therefore, manufacture after-the-fact arguments which allow them to continue doing what they want to do and deceive themselves into believing that the animal suffering does not occur or is somehow justified.

In contrast, most vegetarians like the taste of flesh and wish they could continue eating it, but were able to change their eating habits because they believe that the arguments in favor of vegetarianism were compelling.

Which arguments are more likely to be credible: those that permit a person to continue engaging in a behavior which is satisfying to them but nevertheless causes other beings to suffer or those that convinced a person to cease doing something he or she otherwise enjoyed?

One other thing: all other things being equal, I am going to assume that da Vinci got it right and Ted Nugent got it wrong.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

I am sure that the antelope which is killed by the lion suffers much more than the cow in the slaughterhouse. Should we kill the lions? Maybe da lions are smarter than da Vinci.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
When discussing the merits of vegetarianism, one point seems to be overlooked: being a vegetarian is not easy. I, like most vegetarians, at one time enjoyed eating meat, and it was very difficult to give it up. But I did, because I am concerned about the suffering of animals, and do not want to contribute to it.

On the other hand, a meat eater gives up nothing: he likes meat, and keeps eating it.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe that the difficulty of upholding the consequence of a choice has a bearing on the morality of the choice.

For example, it's not easy being a suicide bomber...




[ QUOTE ]
One other thing: all other things being equal, I am going to assume that da Vinci got it right and Ted Nugent got it wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

All things are not equal as biology seems to be on Nugent's side.






[ QUOTE ]
I, like most vegetarians, at one time enjoyed eating meat, and it was very difficult to give it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respect your choice and congratulate you on successfully modifying your behavior in order to satisfy your own moral code.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
(I mean this in a completely light-hearted way) I am amused by the fact that someone with your screenname is a vegetarian. It clashes with my stereotyping.

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew that screenname would haunt me. I may not be legally allowed to use it, since I've never been to a game and watch about 10 minutes of football a year.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can't remember who said this (maybe Ted Nugent) so I cannot properly credit, but anyway what he said was "Predators have eyes on the front of their head, and prey species have eyes on the side of their head. As long as my eyes are on the front of my head I will not feel guilty enjoying a juicy steak."

Since then I haven't felt guilty either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a Ted Nugent quote, but I'm not sure you would want to associate yourself with them. Ted thinks that he can solve the hunger problem in Africa by just teaching the Africans how to hunt.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure that the antelope which is killed by the lion suffers much more than the cow in the slaughterhouse.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the problem. Most animals suffer much longer than those antelope. The cows probably have it best, even though you can imagine how they feel when packed in a truck for hours in the heat only to have a bolt shot into their head. There are many more that suffer much longer.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't believe that the difficulty of upholding the consequence of a choice has a bearing on the morality of the choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly it does. It's just another example of people justifying their behavior.

[ QUOTE ]
For example, it's not easy being a suicide bomber...


[/ QUOTE ]

In many ways it is. The appeal of eternal life with forty virgins (or whatever it is) makes it easier in some ways.

[ QUOTE ]
All things are not equal as biology seems to be on Nugent's side.

[/ QUOTE ]

For now.

[ QUOTE ]
I respect your choice and congratulate you on successfully modifying your behavior in order to satisfy your own moral code.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eventually I believe it will be the moral code of all those intellectual, just I believe that the intelligent eventually realized that slavery is wrong and women are equal.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Eventually I believe it will be the moral code of all those intellectual, just I believe that the intelligent eventually realized that slavery is wrong and women are equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey now, let's not get crazy.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Eventually I believe it will be the moral code of all those intellectual, just I believe that the intelligent eventually realized that slavery is wrong and women are equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some of the most intelligent people in early America kept slaves. Opinions on slavery were (are) derived more from socialization than biology (intelligence).

Opinions on meat eating are derived firstly from biology, and secondly from socialization. There is a distinct possibility that the majority of society will one day come to see eating (or otherwise using) animals as morally wrong. Intelligence will have little or nothing to do with that fact. If people, even very smart people, find themselves starving - in most cases biology will overcome the factors of socialization contributing to the "no meat eating" moral code - and bambi better watch out.

Re: Are you more intelligent than Leonardo da Vinci?
 

[ QUOTE ]
There is a distinct possibility that the majority of society will one day come to see eating (or otherwise using) animals as morally wrong. Intelligence will have little or nothing to do with that fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moral changes have a lot to do with intelligence.