Is cannibalism only a moral evil because it implies an initial murder?

It's considered the ultimate act of aggression by most standards. It's no surprise that the only people who historically preformed cannibalism were either tribes in near inhospitable lands (subject to performing excessively prevalent acts of violence and sexual abuse, see Psychohistory reports on Papua New Guinea and Abbo tribes) or fringe religious groups on the edge of society.

Not to mention there's a medical risk to eating other people, with such things as Kuru

>>2968356
Not all people who were cannibalized were murdered. Many were dead family members.

>>2968356
Yes, there's literally nothing wrong with eating someone if you had no part in their murder.

>>2968356
Chinese people killed people and ate their organs during the period of Great cultural revolution.

>>2968442
Did the same during the height of the Taiping Rebellion

>>2968449
So, it's their tradition. Better not criticize them from the view of western centrism.

>>2968442
>>2968449
>>2968470
Didn't they do it because they were starving? And even if they were, it's unacceptable. I would prefer to die of starvation than eat another human being

>>2968487
> I would prefer to die of starvation than eat another human being

That's just stupid. If you were actually under that mind-numbing starvation you probably would.

>>2968470
It was due to starvation
>>2968487
Yes. But I still don't think there's anything wrong with eating human meat if you aren't causing the actual death. If someone got into a motorcycle accident, why shouldn't I be able to eat them?

>>2968487
It's unacceptable for them to do it because you wouldn't do it yourself? (well, you claim you wouldn't. But you have never been anywhere near starvation have you?)

>>2968492
It feels morally wrong. In many cultures, there's fairly tales that were told to discourage eating human flesh like the ogres in Europe, the oni in Japan and the wendigo by the Native Americans, not to mention that you develop diseases like >>2968384 said
>>2968491
>>2968514
I was anorexic at one point so I know how starving feels

Nothing is inherently moral or immoral. Morals exist to preserve society, by doing so you can ho around without fearing some jerk might bite your ass. I honestly fine very unsettling the idea of eating something I could talk to.
But at the same time I'm curious about the taste of human flesh.
In the doubt I'll stick to any other movig thing.

>>2968356
As with many general taboos, it's primarily forbidden for health reasons. Cannibalism is really, really dangerous from a disease standpoint.

>>2968356
Isn't organ transplantation arguably similar to cannibalism, morally speaking. To harvest from another human being. Organ transplantation isn't wrong and eating human flesh shouldn't be either, at the most basic level anyway.

>>2968540
It isn't if the person who has their organs removed consents i.e giving a kidney to a family member who would otherwise not survive

>>2968540
>Falseequivalence.jpg

>>2968442
Yea Spaniards and Englishmen also took to cannibalization in the Americas.

>>2968554
You can consent to getting eaten as well. Not that I think people would. Perhaps that's why we instinctively oppose cannibalism. Because we can't imagine anyone consenting to being eaten like any animal.
>>2968560
Nice contribution, fuck-face.

>>2968356
The true question is what human part is more delicious, i would like to try human brain

>>2968517
>willingness to starve yourself
>same as unwillingness to starve to death

Nigga please, if you're anorexic you're already in the state of mind to acceptably and willingly starve yourself because for whatever reasons same with many Buddhist monks being able to starve themselves

During time of famines the common people still want to live and get through another day, sure if they had your state of mind such as anorexia they may not have to resort to cannibalism to survive but many if not all cannot suffer like you did and the hunger pangs would be too unbearable to them compared to just eating your dead neighbors and tree bark

>>2969160
I would try da pusy. Woops, already have. XD

>>2969160
Bicep or thigh would be what I'd want. Maybe ribs too.

File: brainKuru.png (239KB, 720x255px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 720x255px

>>2968384
Kuru is not a very nice thing to have

>>2969190
serious question: have you literally taken a bite out of a pussy before?

>>2968540
Nigga I can't have a Caesar salad shoved into my body to replace my kidney can I?

File: 1472122748805.jpg (435KB, 781x1024px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 781x1024px

>>2969160

>>2970496
>need to shave hair off
Probably not. It'll burn off while cooking.

>>2970512
I'm guessing mommy cooks for you.

Traditional cannibalism is not eating people for food, it's ritualized. A ceremony to deal with the death of a loved one or to deal with PTSD ect, nigga that cunt can't come back and haunt you, we ate his soul remember.

They would share small bits ceremonially, not cook up people roasts every night so there is much less chance of contracting some horrible disease.

Cannibalism for food has ofcourse happened but historically it's been as rare as it is today, only in extreme situations.because if a tribe did prefer people meat they'd all get a disease or get fucked up by the people who don't want to be eaten.

T.cannibal

>>2970496
who does something like this?

File: radioactivity is a friend.jpg (923KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

923KB, 1200x1200px

>>2970524
Edgelords.

>>2970512
The smell of burnt hair can make you throw up nigga

>>2970496
there's actually a risk of obtaining a prion disease by eating any part of the body, prions just so happens to be centered in the brain due to the slow reproduction rate of braincells

>>2968384
there's a medical risk to eating a lot of things humans have historically eaten.

>>2968517
>I was anorexic at one point so I know how starving feels
no you dont. you know how being hungry feels.

>>2968356
>Is cannibalism only a moral evil because it implies an initial murder?
absolutely not, and only someone so deeply corrupted by modernity that they have no knowledge of the foundations of morality could ask this question
eating is a base, animal act, one of our lowest functions
eating a human being is therefore an act of utter debasement, it's a consummate dishonoring of the person, wherein the human is treated as something so profane that it is to be ground by your teeth, dissolved inside your belly, and turned into feces
it's an act of extreme sacrilegious aggression and dominance -- because in eating another person you are presuming to put yourself so far above them that you will treat them as you treat your food, which is immeasurably beneath you -- similar to rape

if these terms make no sense to you, you know you have been seduced by the almost totally amoral reductionism of modernity
cannibalism is a disgusting evil, and the tribes that practice it (as well as their moral relativist defenders in the civilized world) are under the delusion that the attitude with which anthropophagy is undertaken changes the moral significance of the act (as if you could honor your dead mother by raping her corpse if only you believed hard enough that you were thereby honoring her)

File: Auschwitz mode.png (2MB, 968x1296px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 968x1296px

>>2970573
You calling me a liar m8? This pic is me back when I only weighted 130 pounds

>>2970621
Genetics were not kind to you.

>>2970621
I don't know what he's calling you but I'm calling you a retard.

Being anorexic is not comparable to starvation. It's a choice. Starvation isn't. You willingly didn't eat, these people wanted to continue living. There is no basis for it, and you are an idiot.

>>2970621
>130 pounds
>starving
Fucking Americans I swear.
Unless you're over 1m80 you don't even classify as underweight.

>>2970621
If you were 90lbs then you'd be starving. Here you're just really skinny.

>>2970610
Fuck you, faggot. Herodotus talks about relative customs, Greeks vs Indians.
Its all about intention.

Its debasing if that's how you see it, but what would you know? You don't respect your ancestors, physically imbibing their essence and ensuring they live on through you.

>>2970842
>Herodotus talks about relative customs, Greeks vs Indians.
the fact that a master historian succumbed to relativism does not make it the best theory
differences among customs do not imply that neither is superior or correct
>Its debasing if that's how you see it, but what would you know?
this response assumes an incoherent mix of relativism and non-relativism
if its being debasing depends on how i see it, then there is no knowledge (truth) which would imply that it is not debasing; but if there is some knowledge (truth) that implies that it is not debasing, then its being debasing does not depend on how i see it

>>2968356
Yes
There is no reason whatsoever to consider it immoral to eat the flesh of a human who died of unrelated reasons.
At most it could count as stealing a corpse